On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 06:03:24PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Richard Cochran wrote:
> > int posix_cpu_clock_getres(const clockid_t which_clock, struct timespec *ts);
> > int posix_cpu_clock_get(const clockid_t which_clock, struct timespec *ts);
> > -int posix_cpu_clock_set(const clockid_t which_clock, const struct timespec *ts);
> > +int posix_cpu_clock_set(const clockid_t which_clock, struct timespec *ts);
>
> Shouldn't we change the clock_set function to have *ts const in all places ?
Yes, your are right.
> > @@ -293,6 +261,11 @@ static __init int init_posix_timers(void)
> > .clock_adj = do_posix_clock_noadjtime,
> > .timer_create = no_timer_create,
> > .nsleep = no_nsleep,
> > + /* defaults: */
> > + .nsleep_restart = common_nsleep_restart,
> > + .timer_del = common_timer_del,
> > + .timer_get = common_timer_get,
> > + .timer_set = common_timer_set,
>
> Hmm, we do not need to set functional entries for clocks which neither
> implement timer_create nor nsleep.
I know, but I wanted to be really pendantic about what the previous
code was, and what the new code does.
Before: By leaving the k_clock function pointer NULL, the clock
selects common_xyz. This common function may or may make
sense for that clock.
After: By leaving the k_clock function pointer NULL, the clock will
return EINVAL for that syscall.
Maybe it would be better to leave the cleaning up of the common crud
as a follow up patch. What do you think?
Richard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
