Re: RFC: better timer interface

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Tue, 16 May 2017, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> > Yes, that sounds useful to me as well.  As you said it's an independent
> > but somewhat related change.  I can add it to my series, but I'll
> > need a suggestions for a good and short name.  That already was the
> > hardest part for the setup side :)
> 
> If we keep the unusual *_timer() naming (rather than timer_*() as hrtimer
> has), we could use one of
> 
> a) start_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long ms);
> b) restart_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long ms);
> c) mod_timer_ms(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long ms);
>     mod_timer_sec(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long sec);

Please make new functions prefixed with timer_ and get rid of that old
interface completely. It's horrible.
 
timer_init()
timer_start(timer, ms, abs)
timer_start_on(timer, ms, abs, cpu)
timer_cancel(timer, sync)

Is all what's required to make up a new milliseconds based interface.

We really do not need all that mod/restart/ whatever variants. Where is the
point of those?

Thanks,

	tglx