Re: [PATCH V9 08/13] posix clocks: cleanup the CLOCK_DISPTACH macro

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011, Richard Cochran wrote:
> 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?

Fair enough.
--
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