Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751268AbVJQR0q (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:26:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751243AbVJQR0q (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:26:46 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-03.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.57]:33735 "EHLO ms-smtp-03.nyroc.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751231AbVJQR0p (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:26:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:26:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven Rostedt X-X-Sender: rostedt@localhost.localdomain To: Tim Bird cc: Roman Zippel , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , tglx@linutronix.de, george@mvista.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com, paulmck@us.ibm.com, hch@infradead.org, oleg@tv-sign.ru Subject: Re: [PATCH] ktimers subsystem 2.6.14-rc2-kt5 In-Reply-To: <4353D60E.70901@am.sony.com> Message-ID: References: <1128168344.15115.496.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> <1129016558.1728.285.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> <434DA06C.7050801@mvista.com> <1129490809.1728.874.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> <20051017075917.GA4827@elte.hu> <20051017094153.GA9091@elte.hu> <20051017025657.0d2d09cc.akpm@osdl.org> <4353D60E.70901@am.sony.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2217 Lines: 52 On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Tim Bird wrote: > > > > > > It's rather simple: > > - "timer API" vs "timeout API": I got absolutely no acknowlegement that > > this might be a little confusing and in consequence "process timer" may be > > a better name. > > I agree with Thomas on this one. Maybe "timer" and "timeout" are too > close, but I think they are the most descriptive names. > - timeout is something used for a timeout. Timeouts only actually > expire infrequently, so they have a host of attributes associated > with that characteristic. > - timer is something used to time something. They almost always > expire as part of their normal behaviour. In the ktimer code they > have a host of attributes related to this characteristic. > > Thomas answered the suggestion to use "process timer" as an alternative > name, but I didn't see a reply after that from Roman (I may have missed it.) > I can add to this. After this was brought up, I did a little non-scientific survey. I walked around and asked various engineers here at my customer's site, what it meant to them if I had two types of timer APIs, one for "timers" and one for "timeouts". All 100% of 8 people that I asked (not a lot, but still), had no confusion with what they meant. I asked them to explain what these names mean to them, and every one said basically, timeouts are for situations that are for things that lasted too long, and timers and for things where they want to be notified of an event that takes place at some time. They all agreed with me that timeouts were for exceptions and not expected to be triggered, and timers were the other way around and should always be triggered. Not only that, I also asked if these timers would make sense if we called them "kernel" timers and "process" timers. These names confused them because they use both timers in their kernel modules. That convinced me enough to think that Thomas' naming convention is not confusing. -- Steve - 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/