Paul Irofti: > > Paul, that tk_nclocks addition isn't useful. You need to do the > > bounds checking against the number of clocks you have implemented in > > libc. How many clocks the kernel has implemented doesn't matter. > > What you are saying is that we could be in a situation where the kernel > might expose 3 clocks but we only have 2 entries in libc? Why would we get > to that point? When someone changes the clock in the kernel, that means it > is also changed in libc. I don't think we can decouple the two parts. Right?
But we do: make kernel; install kernel; reboot; make build. To cross from nclocks to nclocks+1, you need to run the new nclocks+1 kernel with an nclocks userland. I keep coming back to the idea that we need an <machine/timetc.h> header with #define TC_FOO 1 #define TC_BAR 2 #define TC_NUM 3 /* or TC_LAST or whatever */ Mark may have a better idea how to name this. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de
