Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Feb 2011 11:37:02 +0100 (CET) | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [patch 28/28] posix clocks: Introduce dynamic clocks |
| |
On Wed, 2 Feb 2011, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 01:49:47PM -0800, john stultz wrote: > > I sort of worry about the naming collision with the term posix-clock, as > > this is just one type of posix clock (I suspect most folks think of a > > posix clock as the clockid passed to the existing posix api). > > > > Could we maybe use posix-dynclock or posix-fdclock or something? I know > > its already been changed from clkdev, so sorry for being finicky here > > and not catching this earlier. > > A rose by any other name... > > I agree that naming (even internal APIs) is important and have no > objection to changing the name. I did spend a bit of time considering > various alternatives, and now I'm out of ideas. > > So, please do change the name if you have a better one.
We have a clear distinction between posix-timers and those new posix-clocks. Adding some artificial "fd", "dyn" or whatever will not make it much better.
Thanks,
tglx
| |