Re: [RFC PATCH 13/22 -v2] handle accurate time keeping over long delays

john stultz
2008-01-10T20:41:48Z

On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 15:15 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > I'm trying to figure out all the ramifications of the new
> > "cycle_accumulated" field. Does it really need to be
>
> John,
>
> Before we hardcode these names, can we change them? Later in the series I
> use something called 'cycle_raw' which really should be called
> 'cycle_accumulated'. Since cycle_accumulated IIRC can go backwards.

Err... I don't think the current cycle_accumulated can go backwards. Or
maybe I'm missing what you mean.

> Or do you think I should rename cycle_raw to cycle_monotonic?

That's fine by me either way.

thanks
-john