Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Feb 2023 01:37:44 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] rust: time: New module for timekeeping functions | From | Asahi Lina <> |
| |
On 22/02/2023 01.27, Asahi Lina wrote: > I think that's the better approach, but I was hoping to leave that for a > future patch, especially since right now I'm the only user of this API > in the upcoming Apple GPU driver and it only uses it to implement some > really simple timeouts for polled operations, which isn't much API > coverage... I figured we might get a better idea for what to do once a > second user comes along. For example, do we want straight methods like > that or std::ops trait impls? And do we make everything fallible or > panic on overflow or just wrap?
Also, it's probably worth mentioning that this kind of refactor can be done without rewriting all the user code. For example, here is how I use the APIs:
let timeout = time::ktime_get() + Duration::from_millis(...); while time::ktime_get() < timeout { [...] }
Even if ktime_get() starts returning another type, as long as it can interoperate with core::time::Duration the same way, it will continue to compile (and if it only interoperates with a new kernel-specific Duration, you'd only have to change the `use` statement at the top).
~~ Lina
| |