From: Willy Tarreau <willy@w.ods.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Jim Paris <jim@jtan.com>, Willy Tarreau <willy@w.ods.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: time() glitch on 2.4.18: solved
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 19:20:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021105182019.GA25472@alpha.home.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1036521477.4827.118.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk>
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 06:37:57PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-11-05 at 18:02, Jim Paris wrote:
> > > > > + if (count > LATCH) {
> > > >
> > > > may be (count >= LATCH) would be even better ?
> > >
> > > Some PIT clones seem to hold the LATCH value momentarily judging by
> > > other things that were triggered wrongly by >=
> >
> > If so, then that's a separate problem: the later code
> >
> > count = ((LATCH-1) - count) * TICK_SIZE;
> > delay_at_last_interrupt = (count + LATCH/2) / LATCH;
> >
>
> It might be interesting to catch that case with a printk too and put
> both in 2.5 and see what comes out in the wash yes
could that be the reason a few people have experienced occasionnal jumps
backwards in gettimeofday() a few months ago, which many others could never
reproduce ? Just because of buggy hardware ?
If so, I think the printk patch should be proposed to Marcelo before
2.4.20-final.
Regards,
Willy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-05 18:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-02 6:37 time() glitch on 2.4.18 at 177 days uptime? Jim Paris
2002-11-03 19:32 ` time() glitch on 2.4.18: solved Jim Paris
2002-11-03 20:30 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-05 16:30 ` [PATCH] " Jim Paris
2002-11-05 16:54 ` george anzinger
2002-11-05 17:10 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-11-05 18:16 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-05 18:02 ` Jim Paris
2002-11-05 18:37 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-05 18:20 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2002-11-05 18:50 ` Jim Paris
2002-11-05 17:14 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-11-05 17:42 ` Jim Paris
2002-11-05 18:57 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-05 19:08 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-11-05 19:29 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-05 20:07 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-05 20:14 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-11-05 20:38 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-05 23:15 ` Willy Tarreau
2002-11-06 12:47 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-06 13:25 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-06 23:21 ` Jim Paris
2002-11-05 20:23 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-05 20:57 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-05 20:41 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-06 15:09 ` Christer Weinigel
2002-11-06 15:49 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-05 20:06 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-05 17:32 ` Alan Cox
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=20021105182019.GA25472@alpha.home.local \
--to=willy@w.ods.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=jim@jtan.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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®