> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 08:55:01 +0200 Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm working on the changes to timerfd(), but must admit I am struggling
> > to understand some of the kernel code for working with userspace timers
> > (e.g., in kernel/posix-timers.c).
>
> Join the club.
Ahh
On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 08:55:01 +0200 Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm working on the changes to timerfd(), but must admit I am struggling to
> understand some of the kernel code for working with userspace timers (e.g.,
> in kernel/posix-timers.c).
Join the club.
> Can you suggest
Andrew,
I'm working on the changes to timerfd(), but must admit I am struggling to
understand some of the kernel code for working with userspace timers (e.g.,
in kernel/posix-timers.c). Can you suggest anyone who could provide
assistance?
Cheers,
Michael
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:18:51 +0200
Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:32:29 +0200 Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Andrew,
> >>
> >> The timerfd() syscall went into 2.6.22. While writing the man page f
Andrew,
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:32:29 +0200 Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Andrew,
>>
>> The timerfd() syscall went into 2.6.22. While writing the man page for
>> this syscall I've found some notable limitations of the interface, and I am
>> wondering wheth
> > > (This is the same sort of thing we already have to deal with in
> > > certain situations, such as network stat counters on 32 bit
> > > platforms.)
> >
> > But userspace can't deal with the condition accurately,
>
> Okay, perhaps this is where I'm missing something? If userspace wakes
> up o
On 7/24/07, Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/22/07, Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The value returned by read(2)ing from a timerfd file descriptor is
> > the
> > number of timer overruns. In 2.6.22, this value is 4 bytes, limiting
> > the overrun count to 2^32.
Ray,
> On 7/22/07, Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Problem 1
> > -
> >
> > The value returned by read(2)ing from a timerfd file descriptor is
> > the
> > number of timer overruns. In 2.6.22, this value is 4 bytes, limiting
> > the overrun count to 2^32. Consider an appli
Hey there Michael, all,
On 7/22/07, Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Problem 1
-
The value returned by read(2)ing from a timerfd file descriptor is the
number of timer overruns. In 2.6.22, this value is 4 bytes, limiting the
overrun count to 2^32. Consider an application wh
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 23:38:26 -0700 Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> Davide has already submitted a patch to you to make read() from a timerfd
>>> file descriptor return an 8 byte integer, and I understand it to have been
>>> accepted into -mm.
>> argh. Nobod
On Sun, 22 Jul 2007 23:38:26 -0700 Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Davide has already submitted a patch to you to make read() from a timerfd
> > file descriptor return an 8 byte integer, and I understand it to have been
> > accepted into -mm.
>
> argh. Nobody told me it was an ABI c
On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:32:29 +0200 Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> The timerfd() syscall went into 2.6.22. While writing the man page for
> this syscall I've found some notable limitations of the interface, and I am
> wondering whether you and Linus would consider having
12 matches
Mail list logo
