Messages in this thread | | | Date | 20 May 2005 21:05:50 +0200 | Date | Fri, 20 May 2005 21:05:50 +0200 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] A more general timeout specification |
| |
> I think the accepted and standard way to do this is to use different > "clock"s. For example, in the HRT patch the clocks CLOCK_REALTIME_HR and > CLOCK_MONOTONIC_HR are defined as high resolution clocks.
Note precision here can be fairly long - some timers dont even if they run a minute earlier or later or even longer. For others it can be rather small.
I dont think you want own clocks for all possible numbers. It makes much more sense to give a numerical time offset.
-Andi - 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/
| |