From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932159AbWDFTcA (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:32:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932166AbWDFTb7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:31:59 -0400 Received: from www.osadl.org ([213.239.205.134]:1212 "EHLO mail.tglx.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932159AbWDFTb7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Apr 2006 15:31:59 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] generic clocksource updates From: Thomas Gleixner Reply-To: tglx@linutronix.de To: Roman Zippel Cc: johnstul@us.ibm.com, Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <1144317972.5344.681.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2006 21:32:24 +0200 Message-Id: <1144351944.5925.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 21:00 +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > > > - int is_continuous; > > > > This field was introduced to have a clear property description. The > > rating field might be used for this, but from a given rating on a > > particular CPU architecture it might be hard to deduce whether this > > clock source is good enough so we can switch to high resolution timer > > mode. > > Currently this field isn't needed and as soon we have a need for it, we > can add proper capability information. Is there a reason, why requirements which are known from existing experience must be discarded to be reintroduced later ? tglx