Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 21:31:47 -0700 From: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@flugsvamp.com>, arch@FreeBSD.org, mark@grondar.za, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk>, Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> Subject: Re: new monotime() call for all architectures. Message-ID: <3A160633.CFAE57F8@softweyr.com> References: <XFMail.001117121827.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 17-Nov-00 Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 17, 2000 at 01:08:16PM -0700, Nate Williams wrote:
> >> > >> >> Ok, I just thought the "mono" in his function name is for monotonic.
> >> > >> >> If
> >> > >> >> you are staying on one processor it will work, but if the timestamps
> >> > >> >> have scheduling inbetween the timestamps and you land on a different
> >> > >> >> processor it won't be monotonic anymore.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >It's close enough. :)
> >> > >>
> >> > >> If it isn't dealing properly with async PCC/TSC counters on SMP
> >> > >> machines
> >> > >> it shouldn't be called "monoanyting".
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I guess I totally object to the name now :-)
> >> > >
> >> > >OK, how about bogotime(9)? ;)
> >> >
> >> > It's not returning units of any known time. "bogocount()" maybe...
> >>
> >> How about 'slushycounter()'?
> >
> > falseticker()? (Okay, probably too NTP specfic)
>
> Let's just go back to CS 101 days and call it my_function().
Sorry, Mr. Baldwin, you just got a "D" in your assignment.
Since the function appears to return an increasing nonsensical counter,
"foo" seems somehow appropriate.
--
"Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?"
Wes Peters Softweyr LLC
wes@softweyr.com http://softweyr.com/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3A160633.CFAE57F8>