[lkml]   [2006]   [Apr]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] generic clocksource updates

On Thu, 6 Apr 2006, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> > Currently this field isn't needed and as soon we have a need for it, we
> > can add proper capability information.
> Is there a reason, why requirements which are known from existing
> experience must be discarded to be reintroduced later ?

Then please explain these requirements.
This field shouldn't have been added in first place, I guess I managed to
confuse John when I talked about handling of continuous vs. tick based
clocks. Currently no user should even care about this, it's an
implementation detail of the clock.

bye, Roman
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-04-07 22:46    [W:0.083 / U:4.880 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site