Re: patch to fix set_itimer() behaviour in boundary cases

[George Anzinger]

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > This one I meant to fix in the kernel fwiw; we can put that loop inside
> > > the kernel easily I'm sure
> >
> > Yes, but it will increase the data size of the timer...
>
>
> eh how?
> the way I think it can be done is to just have multiple timers fire
> until the total time is up. It's not a performance issue (a timer firing
> every 24 days.. who cares, esp since such long delays are rare anyway)
> after all...

Sure that works, but you still need to keep info around on when the timer is 
supposed to expire.  This will be at least two words (u64)jiffies_expire_time. 
This would likly end up in the task struc along with the timer itself.

--
George Anzinger   george@xxxxxxxxxx
High-res-timers:  http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/