In article <aanlktikmtykeu80r6wjzs8rn+uuxsmrgjbfn-y7zs...@mail.gmail.com>, Cherry G. Mathew <cherry.g.mat...@gmail.com> wrote: >On 17 November 2008 13:30, Alexander Shishkin ><alexander.shish...@teleca.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 03:47:56PM +0000, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: >>> Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@britannica.bec.de> wrote: >>> > On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 12:10:28PM +0000, Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote: >>> > > Any concerns on this patch? >>> > >>> > Hooking this into timecounters is a completely wrong abstraction. >>> > I'm fine with the userland side, but the kernel internals are simply >>> > wrong. >>> >>> It seems we agree that a long-term solution would be basing everything on >>> callouts, however this code could still be a short-term solution. >> It's not quite like a short-term solution, but more a first step in the >> general direction of kernel high-resolution timers. Existing callouts >> interface would have to be changed as well to achieve what we're after. >> Some ideas were mentioned on the wiki page [1]. >> >> [1]: http://wiki.netbsd.se/high_resolution_timers#Roadmap >> >> Regards, >> -- >> Alex >> > >Did this code ever get committed/tested/reworked ?
no, I don't think so. Perhaps the submitter lost interest? christos
