From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965032Ab2CFSiI (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 13:38:08 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:41237 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964947Ab2CFSiG (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Mar 2012 13:38:06 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:38:05 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Clemens Ladisch Cc: Thomas Gleixner , maglyx@gmail.com, Arnd Bergmann , John Stultz , LKML Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] hpet: factor timer allocate from open Message-Id: <20120306103805.5d8e0d09.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <4F562775.2010501@ladisch.de> References: <20120305230755.35019A02EB@akpm.mtv.corp.google.com> <4F562775.2010501@ladisch.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.20.1; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:04:21 +0100 Clemens Ladisch wrote: > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 5 Mar 2012, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > >> From: Magnus Lynch > >> Subject: hpet: factor timer allocate from open > >> > >> The current implementation of the /dev/hpet driver couples opening the > >> device with allocating one of the (scarce) timers (aka comparators). This > >> is a limitation in that the main counter may be valuable to applications > >> seeking a high-resolution timer who have no use for the interrupt > >> generating functionality of the comparators. > >> > >> This patch alters the open semantics so that when the device is opened, no > >> timer is allocated. Operations that depend on a timer being in context > >> implicitly attempt allocating a timer, to maintain backward compatibility. > > > > AFAICT, there is only fasync which calls hpet_alloc_timer(). All other > > functions are broken by this chage. > > Indeed. There was another call in hpet_ioctl_common(), but it appears > that one somehow got dropped. > > Magnus, is this the patch that you submitted and have tested? I've been carrying this patch since March 2010 - perhaps it rotted.