| To: | jeffpc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] watch64: generic variable monitoring system |
| From: | YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 04 Sep 2004 04:07:27 +0900 (JST) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <200409031319.24863.jeffpc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | USAGI Project |
| References: | <200409031307.01240.jeffpc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200409031319.24863.jeffpc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
In article <200409031319.24863.jeffpc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (at Fri, 03 Sep 2004 13:19:24 -0400), "Josef 'Jeff' Sipek" <jeffpc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> says: > The watch64 system allows the programmer to specify the approximate interval > at which he wants his variables checked. If he tries to specify shorter > interval than the minimum a default value of HZ/10 is used. To minimize > locking, RCU and seqlock are used. On 64-bit systems, all is optimized away. I agree with the basic principle; it is very similar to mine. However, it is too complicated isn't it? I would do per-"table" registration (instead of per-variable one); watch64_getval() seems very ugly to me... -- Hideaki YOSHIFUJI @ USAGI Project <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> GPG FP: 9022 65EB 1ECF 3AD1 0BDF 80D8 4807 F894 E062 0EEA |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC] acx100 inclusion in mainline; generic 802.11 stack, Vladimir Kondratiev |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] watch64: generic variable monitoring system, Jeff Sipek |
| Previous by Thread: | [PATCH 2.6] watch64: generic variable monitoring system, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] watch64: generic variable monitoring system, Jeff Sipek |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |