lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC] New timeofday proposal (v.A1)
    On Wed, 8 Dec 2004, john stultz wrote:

    > Well, its not *that* bad. Similar to the ntp_scale() function, it would
    > look something like:
    >
    > if (interval <= offset_len)
    > return (interval * singleshot_mult)>>shift;
    > else {
    > cycle_t v1,v2;
    > v1 = (offset_len * singleshot_mult)>>shift;
    > v2 = (interval-offset_len)*adjusted_mult)>>shift;
    > return v1+v2;
    > }
    >
    > Where:
    > singleshot_mult = original_mult + ntp_adj + ss_mult
    > and
    > adjusted_mult = original_mult + ntp_adj
    >
    >

    Yuck. Do we support this kind of thing today? Support for periods of a
    tick or so is not an issue right?

    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08    [W:0.024 / U:90.844 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site