Michael, On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 15:12 +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > Davide, Andrew, Linus, et al. > > At the start of this thread > (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/581115 ), I proposed 4 > alternatives to Davide's original timerfd API. Based on the feedback in > that thread (and one or two earlier comments): > > Let's dismiss option (a), since it is an unlovely multiplexing interface. > > Option (b) seems a viable. The most notable concern was from Thomas > Gleixner, that we might end up duplicating code from the POSIX timers API > within the timerfd API -- some eventual refactoring might mitigate this > problem.
It should be possible to use the timerfd syscalls as wrappers for the posix timer implementation and add the discussed SIGEV_TIMERFD only internally in the kernel to signal the posix timer code new delivery mechanism. tglx - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/