Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sat, 19 May 2007 19:59:47 +0200 | | From | Eric Dumazet <> | | Subject | Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8479] New: gettimeofday returning 1000000 in tv_usec on core2duo |
| |
Bill Davidsen a écrit : > Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Tue, 15 May 2007 08:06:52 +0200 Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Andrew Morton a écrit : >>>> On Mon, 14 May 2007 21:17:47 -0700 bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8479 >>>>> >>>>> Summary: gettimeofday returning 1000000 in tv_usec on >>>>> core2duo >>>>> Kernel Version: 2.6.21 >>>>> Status: NEW >>>>> Severity: normal >>>>> Owner: ak@suse.de >>>>> Submitter: dang@gentoo.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Most recent kernel where this bug did *NOT* occur: 2.6.20 >>>>> Distribution: Gentoo >>>>> Hardware Environment: core2duo T7200 (all reporters had this same CPU) >>>>> Software Environment: Linux 2.6.21, glibc 2.5 >>>>> Problem Description: >>>>> >>>>> gettimeofday returns 1 - 1000000 in tv_usec, not 0 - 999999 This >>>>> does not happen on any of my AMD-based 32 or 64 bit boxes, only on my >>>>> core2duo; I have 2 other reports of this problem, all on T7200's >>>>> >>>>> Steps to reproduce: >>>>> >>>>> call gettimeofday a lot. Eventually, you'll get 1000000 returned >>>>> in tv_usec. My >>>>> average is ~1 in 1000000 calls. I've attached my test program, >>>>> with output from >>>>> various boxes. One of the other reporters tried the test program >>>>> too, and got >>>>> similar output. .config will be attached too. >>>> err, whoops. >>> I remember I already hit this and corrected it >>> >>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blobdiff;f=arch/x86_64/kernel/vsyscall.c;h=dc32cef961950915fbaa185e36ab802d5f7cea3b;hp=ba330f87067996a17495f7d03466d646c718b52c;hb=c8118c6c07f2edfd697aaa0b93e08c3b65a5a675;hpb=272a3713bb9e302e0455c894c41180a482d2c8a3 >>> >> >> Oh, OK. >> >>> Maybe a stable push is necessary ? >> >> yup. Please always think of -stable when preparing fixes. I'm sure many >> useful fixes are slipping past simply because those who _are_ looking out >> for backportable fixes are missing things. >> > That makes me feel better, I have been occasionally suggesting fixes > posted here as candidates for stable, I was afraid I was being a PITA. I > forgot about the "stable" address and have been bugging greg, I'll stop > that.
Well, it seems Andrew concern about 'stable' was not right for this particular patch, since I posted it well before 2.6.21-final, and 2.6.20 was not concerned. - 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/
|  |