Re: [PATCH 2/4] don't ignore fd events when an alarm is due

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Max Kellermann wrote:
> also, pass &next_alarm to __run() only if there is an alarm; eliminate
> the "timeout" parameter; the alarm functions get_next_alarm_run() and
> do_alarm_run() return an timeval pointer instead of a boolean.

Hm, this patch makes my CPU suck up after the first alarm run.

-- 
"Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux