From: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow within 50 days
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 10:16:28 -0500 (CDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410061014080.29937@gentwo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410061449290.4383@nanos>
On Mon, 6 Oct 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So if you want to fix that as well, you really need to think about the
> 32 bit case because there is no serialization for the interrupts which
> are delivered directly from their own vector. And no, we should not
> diverge 32 and 64 bit artificially here simply because the same 50
> days wrap applies to both.
Is it a divergence if both 64bit and 32 bit are unsing unsigned long?
>
> I really start to wonder whether all this is worth the trouble. It has
> been this way forever and 1k timer interrupts per second is not really
> a new thing either. So we did not change anything which suddenly makes
> tools confused.
Tools expect the number of interrupt to increase linearly and not jump by
2^32 once in awhile. There are functions in the kernel (/proc/stat) that
sum up various interrupt counters and that are types unsigned long. These
larger numbers can suddenly jump by 2^32. Its pretty unusual for a 64 bit
conter to do that and it requires some head scratching until we figured
that one out.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-06 15:16 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 [this message]
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
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=alpine.DEB.2.11.1410061014080.29937@gentwo.org \
--to=cl@linux.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--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®