Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:34:41 -0500 | From | Benjamin LaHaise <> | Subject | Re: [Patch] Re: Nasty suprise with uptime |
| |
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 01:03:32PM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > does the jumps on condition and tests for zero, even after the > flags have been set by the previous operation, I tested what > the result was. It turns out that it's only a couple of clock > cycles, not the 6 extra clocks that the hand calculation shows.
*sigh* You're not testing any of the effects on available execution resources within the processor.
> So, if you leave jiffies alone, but bump another variable when it > wraps, you get to eat your cake and keep it too.
As Linus pointed out, using casting tricks with a long long will just work for this case. Sounds good to me.
-ben - 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/
|  |