From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow within 50 days
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 14:15:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1412338512.19413.85.camel@x220> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410030653040.8496@gentwo.org>
On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 06:54 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > > Is this the way its intended or should the counters be expanded to 64 bit?
> >
> > There is no reason why we cannot or should not expand them.
>
> Ok here is a patch to do just that:
>
>
> Subject: Increase irq counters to 64 bit
>
>
> Irq counters can overflow easily if they are just 32 bit.
>
> For example the timer interrupt occurs 1000 times per second, so
> it is predictable that the timer interrupt will overflow in
>
>
> 2^ 32 / 1000 [interrupts per second] / 86400 [seconds in a day]
>
> which results in 46 days.
dc -e "1 k 2 32 ^ 1000 / 86400 / p"
49.7
(That was the number I remembered from stories about a ancient Windows
lockup.)
> Other irq counters for devices may wrap even faster for example
> those for high speed networking devices.
>
> This patch is needed to avoid the counter overflow by increasing
> the counters to 64 bit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Paul Bolle
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-03 12:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-03 9:45 Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 10:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-03 11:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 12:03 ` Richard Cochran
2014-10-03 12:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 12:17 ` Richard Cochran
2014-10-03 14:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 21:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-05 23:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 23:57 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-10-06 8:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 10:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-06 13:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 15:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-06 15:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 19:34 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-06 15:31 ` David Lang
2014-10-06 19:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 23:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-10-06 7:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 10:49 ` David Lang
2014-10-06 12:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-03 12:15 ` Paul Bolle [this message]
2014-10-03 12:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-04 10:26 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1412338512.19413.85.camel@x220 \
--to=pebolle@tiscali.nl \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®