From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762672AbdEWL7O (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 May 2017 07:59:14 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:53471 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759899AbdEWL7M (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 May 2017 07:59:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 13:58:57 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: David Laight cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-s390 , Mark Gross , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Tejun Heo , linuxppc-dev , Christoph Hellwig Subject: RE: RFC: better timer interface In-Reply-To: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6DCFFFD8B2@AcuExch.aculab.com> Message-ID: References: <20170516114812.10660-1-hch@lst.de> <20170516155132.GA1494@lst.de> <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6DCFFFD8B2@AcuExch.aculab.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 23 May 2017, David Laight wrote: > From: Thomas Gleixner > > Sent: 21 May 2017 19:15 > ... > > > timer_start(timer, ms, abs) > > > > I'm not even sure, whether we need absolute timer wheel timers at > > all, because most use cases are relative to now. > > Posix requires absolute timers for some userspace calls > (annoying because the code often wants relative). Posix is completely irrelevant here. These timers are purely kernel internal. Thanks, tglx