Re: [patch 00/21] hrtimer - High-resolution timer subsystem

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> >>Just curious -- why the "k" thing?
> >
> >
> >yeah. 'struct timer' and 'struct timeout' is even better. I tried it on 
> 
> Oh good, glad you think so :)
> 
> >real code and sometimes it looked a bit funny: often we have a 'timeout' 
> >parameter somewhere that is a scalar or a timeval/timespec. So at least 
> 
> Sure... hmm, the names timeout and timer themselves have something 
> vagely wrong about them, but I can't quite place my finger on it, not 
> a real worry though...
> 
> Maybe it is that timeout is an end result, but timer is a mechanism.  

hm, i think you are right.

> So maybe it should be 'struct interval', 'struct timeout'; or 'struct 
> timer', 'struct timeout_timer'.

maybe 'struct timer' and 'struct hrtimer' is the right solution after 
all, and our latest queue doing 'struct timer_list' + 'struct hrtimer' 
is actually quite close to it.

'struct ptimer' does have a bit of vagueness in it at first sight, do 
you agree with that? (does it mean 'process'? 'posix'? 'precision'?) 

also, hrtimers on low-res clocks do have high internal resolution, but 
they are not precise timing mechanisms in the end, due to the low-res 
clock. So the more generic name would be 'high-resolution timers', not 
'precision timers'. (also, the name 'precision timers' sounds a bit 
funny too, but i dont really know why.)

	Ingo