lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: timer_settime() and ECANCELED
Date
Michael,

"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com> writes:
> On 4/1/20 7:42 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> (b): Arming the timer in that case is indeed very questionable, but it
>> could be argued that because the clock was set event happened with
>> the old expiry value that the new expiry value is not affected.
>>
>> I'd be happy to change that and not arm the timer in the case of a
>> pending cancel, but I fear that some user space already depends on
>> that behaviour.
>
> Yes, that's the risk, of course. So, shall we just document all
> this in the manual page?

I think so.

Thanks,

tglx

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-04-02 10:49    [W:0.065 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site