Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751454AbWHWHwM (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:52:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751452AbWHWHwM (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:52:12 -0400 Received: from relay.2ka.mipt.ru ([194.85.82.65]:53663 "EHLO 2ka.mipt.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751450AbWHWHwL (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 03:52:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:50:56 +0400 From: Evgeniy Polyakov To: Andrew Morton Cc: Jari Sundell , David Miller , kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, nmiell@comcast.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, zach.brown@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org Subject: Re: [take12 0/3] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism. Message-ID: <20060823075056.GA18029@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <20060822231129.GA18296@ms2.inr.ac.ru> <20060822.173200.126578369.davem@davemloft.net> <20060823065659.GC24787@2ka.mipt.ru> <20060823000758.5ebed7dd.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060823000758.5ebed7dd.akpm@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-1.7.5 (2ka.mipt.ru [0.0.0.0]); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 11:51:00 +0400 (MSD) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1681 Lines: 36 On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:07:58AM -0700, Andrew Morton (akpm@osdl.org) wrote: > On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 10:56:59 +0400 > Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 02:43:50AM +0200, Jari Sundell (sundell.software@gmail.com) wrote: > > > Actually, I didn't miss that, it is an orthogonal issue. A timespec > > > timeout parameter for the syscall does not imply the use of timespec > > > in any timer event, etc. Nor is there any timespec timer in kqueue's > > > struct kevent, which is the only (interface related) thing that will > > > be exposed. > > > > void * in structure exported to userspace is forbidden. > > long in syscall requires wrapper in per-arch code (although that > > workaround _is_ there, it does not mean that broken interface should > > be used). > > poll uses millisecods - it is perfectly ok. > > I wonder whether designing-in a millisecond granularity is the right thing > to do. If in a few years the kernel is running tickless with high-res clock > interrupt sources, that might look a bit lumpy. > > Switching it to a __u64 nanosecond counter would be basically free on > 64-bit machines, and not very expensive on 32-bit, no? I can put nanoseconds as timer interval too (with aligned_u64 as David mentioned), and put it for timeout value too - 64 bit nanosecods ends up with 58 years, probably enough. Structures with u64 a really not so good idea. -- Evgeniy Polyakov - 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/