Messages in this thread | | | From | David Mosberger <> | Date | Thu, 6 Mar 2003 17:27:03 -0800 | Subject | Re: POSIX timer syscalls |
| |
>>>>> On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 15:53:50 -0800, george anzinger <george@mvista.com> said:
George> I think there is a bit of a problem in the idr code George> (.../lib/idr.c) which manages the id allocation. Seems we George> are returning "long" from functions declared as int. If I George> remember the code correctly this will work, but it does George> eliminate the sequence number that should be in the high 8 George> bits of the id.
Yes. We have had some reports of problems with POSIX timers and I suspect this might be the reason (though I don't know what the exact code-base was that the person reporting the problem was using).
George> This assumes that you never allocate more than 2,147,483,647 George> timers at once :) I will look at this and send in a patch. George> I think we should return what ever timer_t is, so we should George> run that to ground first.
Yes, that would be better. According to Uli, a 32-bit timer_t is fine as far as the standards are concerned. That's good.
George> I suspect we should also have a look at all the structures George> with a view to alignment issues or is this not a problem? George> I.e. is this struct ok:
George> struct { long a; int b; long c; }
Such code may be OK correctnesswise, but to avoid wasting space, it's clearly better to list larger members first.
--david - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |