lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [patch 00/43] ktimer reworked
Date
On Dec 07, 2005, at 07:34, Roman Zippel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, James Bruce wrote:
>> And that's the whole *point* about how we got here. Let the low
>> resolution, low lifetime timeouts stay on the timer wheel, and
>> make a new approach that specializes in handling longer lifetime,
>> higher resolution timers. That's ktimers in a nutshell. You seem
>> to be arguing for it rather than against it.
>
> I do, just without the focus on the lifetime, which is really
> unimportant for most kernel developers.

It _is_ important. Not because kernel developers do care about it,
but because it's important for reasons of its own and therefore they
should. Networking timeouts and highres audio timers are two _VERY_
different applications of "do this thing then", and kernel developers
should be made aware of them. If you disagree, please explain in
detail exactly why you think the lifetime is unimportant. I have yet
to see an email regarding this, and I've searched the archives pretty
carefully, in addition to watching this thread.

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett

--
I lost interest in "blade servers" when I found they didn't throw
knives at people who weren't supposed to be in your machine room.
-- Anthony de Boer


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-12-07 15:18    [W:0.107 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site