mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com>
Cc: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	tglx@linutronix.de, george@mvista.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com,
	paulmck@us.ibm.com, hch@infradead.org, oleg@tv-sign.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH]  ktimers subsystem 2.6.14-rc2-kt5
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:26:12 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510171312030.10443@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4353D60E.70901@am.sony.com>



On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Tim Bird wrote:

> >
> >
> > It's rather simple:
> > - "timer API" vs "timeout API": I got absolutely no acknowlegement that
> > this might be a little confusing and in consequence "process timer" may be
> > a better name.
>
> I agree with Thomas on this one.  Maybe "timer" and "timeout" are too
> close, but I think they are the most descriptive names.
>   - timeout is something used for a timeout.  Timeouts only actually
>   expire infrequently, so they have a host of attributes associated
>   with that characteristic.
>   - timer is something used to time something.  They almost always
>   expire as part of their normal behaviour.  In the ktimer code they
>   have a host of attributes related to this characteristic.
>
> Thomas answered the suggestion to use "process timer" as an alternative
> name, but I didn't see a reply after that from Roman (I may have missed it.)
>

I can add to this.  After this was brought up, I did a little
non-scientific survey. I walked around and asked various engineers here at
my customer's site, what it meant to them if I had two types of timer
APIs, one for "timers" and one for "timeouts".  All 100% of 8 people that
I asked (not a lot, but still), had no confusion with what they meant.  I
asked them to explain what these names mean to them, and every one said
basically, timeouts are for situations that are for things that lasted too
long, and timers and for things where they want to be notified of an
event that takes place at some time.

They all agreed with me that timeouts were for exceptions and not expected
to be triggered, and timers were the other way around and should always be
triggered.

Not only that, I also asked if these timers would make sense if we called
them "kernel" timers and "process" timers.  These names confused them
because they use both timers in their kernel modules.

That convinced me enough to think that Thomas' naming convention is not
confusing.

-- Steve


  reply	other threads:[~2005-10-17 17:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-09-28 20:43 tglx
2005-09-28 23:59 ` Frank Sorenson
2005-09-29  0:50   ` Frank Sorenson
2005-09-29  0:56     ` john stultz
2005-09-29  1:05       ` Frank Sorenson
2005-09-29  1:10 ` john stultz
2005-09-29  6:53   ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-09-30 15:58     ` Frank Sorenson
2005-09-29 19:57 ` George Anzinger
2005-10-01  1:03 ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-01 11:22   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-04  1:59     ` George Anzinger
2005-10-04  5:51       ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-10 12:42     ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-10 14:04       ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-01 12:05   ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-10-10 17:22     ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-11  7:42       ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-10-12 22:36         ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-12 23:46           ` George Anzinger
2005-10-16 16:34             ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-16 19:26               ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-10-16 23:03                 ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17  7:59                   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-17  8:26                     ` Steven Rostedt
2005-10-17  9:29                     ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17  9:41                       ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-17  9:56                         ` Andrew Morton
2005-10-17 11:00                           ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-17 16:25                           ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17 16:49                             ` Tim Bird
2005-10-17 17:26                               ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2005-10-17 18:49                               ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17 19:19                                 ` Tim Bird
2005-10-17 19:48                                   ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17 20:13                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-17 20:31                                       ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-18  8:46                                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-18 23:52                                           ` Tim Bird
2005-10-19  0:03                                             ` George Anzinger
2005-10-19  1:58                                           ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-19  6:46                                             ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-19 10:49                                             ` kernel/timer.c design (was: Re: ktimers subsystem) Ingo Molnar
2005-10-19 17:48                                               ` kernel/timer.c design Tim Bird
2005-10-19 18:00                                               ` Tim Bird
2005-10-19 19:04                                                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-10-19 22:12                                               ` kernel/timer.c design (was: Re: ktimers subsystem) Roman Zippel
2005-10-19 11:40                                             ` [PATCH] ktimers subsystem 2.6.14-rc2-kt5 Ingo Molnar
2005-10-19 11:58                                             ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-19 22:24                                               ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17 20:09                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-17 20:55                             ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-10-18  0:07                               ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-18  1:03                                 ` George Anzinger
2005-10-19  1:26                                   ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-19  2:52                                     ` George Anzinger
2005-10-21 16:22                                       ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-23 18:17                                         ` George Anzinger
2005-10-27 20:23                                           ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-28  4:52                                             ` Steven Rostedt
2005-10-28 16:06                                               ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17 16:33                         ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17 16:39                           ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-17 16:54                             ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17 17:35                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-10-17  9:54                       ` Steven Rostedt
2005-10-04  1:55   ` George Anzinger
2005-10-17 18:38 linux
2005-10-17 19:04 ` Roman Zippel
2005-10-17 22:41   ` linux

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.58.0510171312030.10443@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=george@mvista.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
    --cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tim.bird@am.sony.com \
    --cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®