lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC V2 4/6] time: introduce leap second functional interface
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 01:24:57PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 05/21/2012 12:18 PM, Richard Cochran wrote:
> Hrm. I prefer to keep things fairly flat (even having time.h and
> timex.h bugs me somewhat). But having such a separation could be
> useful, but maybe at a slightly more coarse level. Something like
> timekeeping-internal.h and time.h, splitting all the general
> accessors away from the non-general.

Yes, time.h is full of stuff not really for public use. When compiling
on an atom netbook as I do, it gets really noticeable and annoying
when you tweak some private prototype, and then the whole darn kernel
rebuilds.

> The locking order is pretty straight forward: timekeeper.lock ->
> ntp_lock. This only gets messy when you require timekeeping data
> from the ntp context, but usually we provide the required data via
> the caller. But better documentation is always welcome.

The icky part is the fact that ntp would need access to timekeeper
state while holding ntp_lock.

Richard


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-05-22 07:01    [W:1.428 / U:0.232 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site