From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261601AbVFBHss (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 03:48:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261603AbVFBHss (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 03:48:48 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:60140 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261601AbVFBHsq (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 03:48:46 -0400 Subject: Re: Accessing monotonic clock from modules From: Arjan van de Ven To: Robert Love Cc: Mikael Starvik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1117698045.6833.16.camel@jenny.boston.ximian.com> References: <1117697423.6458.18.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1117698045.6833.16.camel@jenny.boston.ximian.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 09:48:38 +0200 Message-Id: <1117698518.6458.21.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (3.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 03:40 -0400, Robert Love wrote: > On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 09:30 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 08:36 +0200, Mikael Starvik wrote: > > > We would like to get the posix monotonic clock from a loadable module. > > > Would a patch to make do_posix_clock_monotonic_gettime exported ok or > > > should we do it in some other way? > > > > > > /Mikael > > > > also... when are you going to get this module merged? > > (exporting things without the module going into kernel.org shouldn't be > > done imo... it makes it harder to change internals and causes overhead > > for all kernel users) > > And if we are going to make it an official interface, does it have to be > called "do_posix_clock_monotonic_gettime" ? Perhaps a more > export-friendly name? agreed. well maybe it doesn't have such a name since it isn't intended as such interface....