Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 1 Nov 2001 09:45:49 +0200 | From | Ville Herva <> | Subject | Re: [Patch] Re: Nasty suprise with uptime |
| |
On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 04:17:36PM -0500, you [Richard B. Johnson] claimed: > > u64 get_jiffies64(void) > > { > > static unsigned long jiffies_hi = 0; > > static unsigned long jiffies_last = INITIAL_JIFFIES; > > > > /* probably need locking for this part */ > > if (jiffies < jiffies_last) { /* We have a wrap */ > > jiffies_hi++; > > jiffies_last = jiffies; > > } > > > > return (jiffies | ((u64)jiffies_hi) << LONG_SHIFT)); > > } > > Ah, yes. It's perfect. It could be put right in the 'uptime' code. > It has zero overhead otherwise.
Just my two cents... I would prefer that to be in kernel (it has what, 8 byte overhead), so that /proc/uptime is correct, not just uptime(1) output. There are other programs that access /proc/uptime as well, so it would be good to fix it in one place.
I was thinking, could there be a elegant(ish) place in the kernel where one could drop a dummy call to get_jiffies64 so that it would always be called at least once a 497 days (I'm not sure wher the 1.3 years value comes from)?
Other than that this seems a good alternative.
-- v --
v@iki.fi - 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/
|  |