lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH NET-NEXT 02/10] time sync: generic infrastructure to map between time stamps generated by a time counter and system time
From
From: John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 11:27:47 -0800

> On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 18:02 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-02-05 at 10:21 +0000, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 21:44 +0200, john stultz wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2009-02-04 at 14:01 +0100, Patrick Ohly wrote:
> > > > I sort of object to the name clocksync, as you're not really doing
> > > > anything to sync clocks in the code. One, "clock" is an way overloaded
> > > > term in the kernel. Two, you're really seem to be just providing deltas
> > > > and skew rates between notions of time. I want to avoid someone thinking
> > > > "Oh, NTP must use this code".
> > > >
> > > > So maybe something like timecompare.c?
> > >
> > > Fine with me.
> >
> > As there were no other comments I renamed the file, functions and struct
> > accordingly. As I said in my mail, I prefer "struct timecompare" over
> > "struct time_comparator". I also used "timecompare_transform()".
> >
> > Is this revision of the patch okay? How should the two patches get
> > included in the main kernel - via netdev-next-2.6?
> >
> > Bye, Patrick
>
> Small comment below, but otherwise it looks ok to me. I usually push
> patches through Andrew, so I'd probably go that way. But I'd leave it to
> Dave if he's comfortable pushing them to Linus.
>
> Acked-by: John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>

Patrick, please submit these two changes fresh now that all of
the issues are resolved and you have the ACKs :-)

I'll queue them up in net-next-2.6


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-02-10 00:01    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans