Hi, On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky wrote:
> Hmm, I cannot think of more ways to specify a timeout than how > long I want to wait (relative) or until when (absolute) and which > is the reference clock. And they don't seem broken to me, common > sense, in any case. Do you have any examples? You still didn't explain what's the point in choosing different clock sources for a _timeout_. > Different versions of the same function that do relative, absolute. > If I keep going that way, the reason becomes: > > sys_mutex_lock > sys_mutex_lock_timed_relative_clock_realtime > sys_mutex_lock_timed_absolute_clock_realtime > sys_mutex_lock_timed_relative_clock_monotonic > sys_mutex_lock_timed_absolute_clock_monotonic > sys_mutex_lock_timed_relative_clock_monotonic_highres > sys_mutex_lock_timed_absolute_clock_monotonic_highres Hiding it behind an API makes it better? You didn't answer my other question, let's assume we add such a timeout structure, what's wrong with converting it to kernel time (which would automatically validate it). bye, Roman - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
