lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Why HZ on i386 is 100 ?
    On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 08:37:43AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
    > Why are we still measuring uptime using the tick variable? Ticks != time.
    > Surely we should be recording the boot time somewhere (probably on a
    > file system), and then comparing that with the current time?

    It depends on the meaning of "is", er, opps, I mean: it depends on the
    meaning of "uptime".

    The notebook I am typing on at this moment was last booted just about
    exactly 8 days ago (judging from the timestamp on /var/log/dmesg) but
    in a cat-like way it spends a lot of its time asleep and so top
    reports an uptime of only "4 days, 2:42".

    Which is correct? I suggest that the smaller number is closer to
    correct because that is roughly the amount of time the system has
    actually spent running.


    -kb, the Kent who expects this question to get more complicated as the
    new suspend gets more and more clever and if the kernel ever starts
    seriously catnapping on its own.
    -
    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 13:25    [W:0.022 / U:31.496 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site