Re: RFC: A revised timerfd API

[Michael Kerrisk]

David Härdeman wrote:
> On Tue, September 18, 2007 13:30, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>>         timer_gettime(fd | POSIX_TIMER_FD, .....);
>> If we use the most significant bit for POSIX_TIMER_FD, we should be
>> fine.
> 
> I think alternative b) - three new syscalls, sounds better.
> 
> The only negatives so far are that it adds more syscalls and that it might
> require code duplication with posix timers. The syscall numbers argument
> seemed not to be very important and the code duplication should be fixable
> by refactoring the code so that more is shared between the two systems (I
> assume).

Yes, I'm inclined to agree with you on both points.

> Overloading file descriptors with flags looks ugly, is there any other
> syscall which does that?

AFAIK there is no other syscall that does that.  I agree that it's not very
pretty.

Cheers,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
maintainer of Linux man pages Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7

Want to help with man page maintenance?  Grab the latest tarball at
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/manpages/
read the HOWTOHELP file and grep the source files for 'FIXME'.

-
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/