Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Feb 2002 23:32:03 +0100 (CET) | From | Tim Schmielau <> | Subject | Re: jiffies rollover, uptime etc. |
| |
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Ben Greear wrote:
> I wonder, is it more expensive to write all drivers to handle the > wraps than to take the long long increment hit? The increment is > once every 10 miliseconds, right? That is not too often, all things > considered...
This is just a matter of getting the signed/unsigned declarations right in comparisons. (time_before and time_after macros were introduced to aid here, hint!) No overhead is involved here.
Actually, quite a few bug fixes in this area went into 2.4.18pre, with some more to come in 2.4.19pre.
> > Maybe the non-atomicity of the long long increment is the problem?
Yes.
> Does this problem still exist on 64-bit machines? >
No.
> THanks, > Ben
Tim
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |