From: "Krishna Kumar" <kumarkr@us.ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@turbolabs.com>,
ak@muc.de, andrewm@uow.edu.au,
"David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com,
owner-netdev@oss.sgi.com, tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/ipv4/*, net/core/neighbour.c jiffies cleanup
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 19:07:47 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <OF80A3FFE5.FC1D4628-ON88256AFE.0010957E@boulder.ibm.com> (raw)
> Unsigned arithmetic is fine. The _correct_ way to test whether something
> is in within
>
> [ start , start+HZ ]
>
> is to do
>
> if (jiffies - start <= HZ)
>
> try it. The C language guarantees that unsigned arithmetic works in a
> "modulo power of two" fashion, which means that it _is_ ok to do
> arithmetic on unsigned longs, and jiffy wrapping does not matter. No need
> to cast to "signed" or anything else.
>
> In short: It is wrong to do
>
> if (jiffies <= start+HZ)
>
> and it is _right_ to do
>
> if (jiffies - start <= HZ)
Actually this last part is wrong, isn't it ? jiffies <= start + HZ is also
a correct way to do it, since start+HZ will overflow to the current value
of
jiffies when HZ time elapses. So the above two statements are IDENTICAL. I
agree with the rest of the statements, and especially that you don't need
to worry about wrapping using unsigned numbers.
Regards,
- KK
> (as long as "start" is "unsigned long" like jiffies).
>
> Linus
next reply other threads:[~2001-11-08 3:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-11-08 3:07 Krishna Kumar [this message]
2001-11-08 5:26 ` Linus Torvalds
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-11-08 17:47 Krishna Kumar
2001-11-08 16:55 Krishna Kumar
2001-11-08 17:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-11-08 18:01 ` Andreas Dilger
2001-11-09 10:43 ` Vino Thomas
2001-11-08 0:00 Tim Schmielau
2001-11-08 0:09 ` David S. Miller
2001-11-08 0:36 ` Andreas Dilger
2001-11-08 1:22 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-11-08 0:44 ` David S. Miller
2001-11-08 0:58 ` Tim Schmielau
2001-11-08 1:09 ` David S. Miller
2001-11-08 1:20 ` Tim Schmielau
2001-11-08 1:36 ` David S. Miller
2001-11-08 4:32 ` Andreas Dilger
2001-11-08 4:39 ` David S. Miller
2001-11-08 17:54 ` kuznet
2001-11-08 18:10 ` Tim Schmielau
2001-11-08 18:10 ` Andreas Dilger
2001-11-08 18:32 ` kuznet
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=OF80A3FFE5.FC1D4628-ON88256AFE.0010957E@boulder.ibm.com \
--to=kumarkr@us.ibm.com \
--cc=adilger@turbolabs.com \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=andrewm@uow.edu.au \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=owner-netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
/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®