Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932364AbVLARpA (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:45:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932370AbVLARpA (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:45:00 -0500 Received: from scrub.xs4all.nl ([194.109.195.176]:53977 "EHLO scrub.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932364AbVLARo7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2005 12:44:59 -0500 Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 18:44:32 +0100 (CET) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@scrub.home To: Russell King cc: ray-gmail@madrabbit.org, Kyle Moffett , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, mingo@elte.hu, george@mvista.com, johnstul@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [patch 00/43] ktimer reworked In-Reply-To: <20051201165144.GC31551@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: References: <1133395019.32542.443.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> <23CA09D3-4C11-4A4B-A5C6-3C38FA9C203D@mac.com> <2c0942db0512010822x1ae20622obf224ce9728e83f8@mail.gmail.com> <20051201165144.GC31551@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> 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: 1305 Lines: 36 Hi, On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Russell King wrote: > timeout > > A period of time after which an error condition is raised if some event > has not occured. A common example is sending a message. If the receiver > does not acknowledge the message within some preset timeout period, a > transmission error is assumed to have occured. > > timer > > a timepiece that measures a time interval and signals its end > > Hence, timers have the implication that they are _expected_ to expire. > Timeouts have the implication that their expiry is an exceptional > condition. IOW a timeout uses a timer to implement an exceptional condition after a period of time expires. > So can we stop rehashing this stupid discussion? The naming isn't actually my primary concern. I want a precise definition of the expected behaviour and usage of the old and new timer system. If I had this, it would be far easier to choose a proper name. E.g. I still don't know why ktimeout should be restricted to raise just "error conditions", as the name implies. bye, Roman - 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/