lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Nasty suprise with uptime
    J Sloan wrote:
    >
    > Alan Cox wrote:
    >
    > > > and received a nasty surprise. The uptime, which had been 496+ days
    > > > on Friday, was back down to a few hours. I was ready to lart somebody
    > > > with great vigor when I realized the uptime counter had simply wrapped
    > > > around.
    > > >
    > > > So, I thought to myself, at least the 2.4 kernels on our new boxes won't
    > >
    > > It wraps at 496 days. The drivers are aware of it and dont crash the box
    >
    > Yes, and these boxes are still running fine - other
    > than showing some processes that were started
    > in the year 2003... but DAMN, what an eyesore -
    > uptime ruined as far as anybody can tell, times
    > and dates no longer making any sense.
    >
    > So, is there an implicit Linux policy to upgrade
    > the distro, or at least the kernel, every 496 days
    > whether it needs it or not?

    Time for a plug for the High-res-timers project. We have expanded
    jiffies to 64 bits. It can be read as the CLOCK_MONOTONIC via the new
    POSIX timers interface (part of high-res-timers). Haven't fixed uptime
    yet, but hay, I got 496 days to do it :)

    Find our latest patch here:
    https://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/

    George
    -
    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 13:12    [W:2.097 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site