From: mec.gnu@mindspring.com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)
To: ak@suse.de, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6 nanosecond time stamp weirdness breaks GCC build
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 15:51:33 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040401205133.6C94F4B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> (raw)
Andi Kleen writes:
> The solution from back then I actually liked best was to just round
> up to the next second instead of rounding down when going from 1s
> resolution to ns.
(My understanding of kernel internals is way rusty, so if I am
talking nonsense here, just hit me with a cluestick or ignore
me or something).
Ummm, I think that will just fail in the converse way if
insn-conditions.o is retained in the inode cache while
insn-conditions.c is dropped from the cache?
That is, consider these time-stamps:
insn-conditions.c SSSS.NS1
insn-conditions.o SSSS.NS2
Where SSSS is the same value on both files, and NS2 > NS1.
According to Ulrich, the current problem is that insn-conditions.o
is dropped from the cache, so NS2 becomes 0, and insn-conditions.o
becomes older than insn-conditions.c.
With your patch, suppose that insn-conditions.c is dropped from the
cache, while insn-conditions.o remains. Then the timestamps will be:
insn-conditions.c SSSS+1.0
insn-conditions.o SSSS.NS2
We lose again, insn-conditions.c has become newer than insn-conditions.o.
insn-conditions.c is a generated file so I think this can actually
happen during a gcc build.
Michael C
next reply other threads:[~2004-04-01 20:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-01 20:51 Michael Elizabeth Chastain [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-04-01 19:28 Ulrich Weigand
2004-04-01 20:09 ` Andi Kleen
2004-04-01 20:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-04-01 20:46 ` Andi Kleen
2004-04-01 21:01 ` Ulrich Weigand
2004-04-01 21:44 ` Andi Kleen
2004-04-01 22:39 ` Joe Buck
2004-04-01 22:44 ` Paul Jarc
2004-04-01 22:48 ` Ulrich Weigand
2004-04-01 23:58 ` Joe Buck
2004-04-02 0:13 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-04-02 0:02 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-04-02 0:35 ` Paul Eggert
2004-04-02 1:14 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-04-02 7:57 ` James H. Cloos Jr.
2004-04-02 9:22 ` Paul Eggert
2004-04-02 16:23 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-04-02 20:45 ` Paul Eggert
2004-04-02 21:07 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-04-02 21:56 ` Paul Eggert
2004-04-03 4:59 ` Andrew Pimlott
2004-04-02 0:37 ` Andrew Morton
2004-06-07 16:03 ` Jörn Engel
2004-04-01 21:13 ` Janis Johnson
2004-04-01 21:41 ` Ulrich Weigand
2004-04-02 0:30 ` Alan Modra
2004-04-02 9:05 ` P
2004-04-02 17:27 ` Alexandre Oliva
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=20040401205133.6C94F4B104@berman.michael-chastain.com \
--to=mec.gnu@mindspring.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--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®