Re: [Linux-ia64] [patch] 2.4 timer_interrupt/gettimeoffset machvec

[Jes Sorensen <jes@wildopensource.com>]

>>>>> "David" = David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com> writes:

>>>>> On 17 Apr 2003 19:02:26 -0400, Jes Sorensen <jes@wildopensource.com> said:
Jes> Comments? If you think this is a better solution, I'll go ahead
Jes> and forward port it to 2.5 as well.

David> I thought we agreed that gettimeoffset() should just be a
David> function pointer?  Also, in 2.5, there is already a
David> "clock_was_set()" call-back (for the POSIX timers).  Perhaps
David> that should be considered.

Is there a real difference between using a plain function pointer and
a machvec? Admittedly I have just been considering machvec's as
function pointers with a fancy name, however I'll be happy to change
it to a regular function pointer instead.

I'll take a look at clock_was_set().

Thanks,
Jes