Michael,

On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 15:12 +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
quoted text
> Davide, Andrew, Linus, et al.
> 
> At the start of this thread
> (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/581115 ), I proposed 4
> alternatives to Davide's original timerfd API.  Based on the feedback in
> that thread (and one or two earlier comments):
> 
> Let's dismiss option (a), since it is an unlovely multiplexing interface.
> 
> Option (b) seems a viable.  The most notable concern was from Thomas
> Gleixner, that we might end up duplicating code from the POSIX timers API
> within the timerfd API -- some eventual refactoring might mitigate this
> problem.

It should be possible to use the timerfd syscalls as wrappers for the
posix timer implementation and add the discussed SIGEV_TIMERFD only
internally in the kernel to signal the posix timer code new delivery
mechanism.

	tglx


	

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/