[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH *] use 64 bit jiffies
On 3 February 2003 10:28, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 08:42:59AM +0200, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> > On 3 February 2003 00:55, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> > > Just a note that I have rediffed for 2.5.55 the patches that use
> > > the 64 bit jiffies value to avoid uptime and process start time
> > > wrap after 49.5 days. I will push them Linus-wards when he's
> > > back. They can be retrieved from
> ....
> > Wow... your patches are STILL not included??
> > My 2.4 based server approaches 250 days uptime, it would be a shame
> > to be unable to have uptime < 50 days with 2.5
> You don't need to have 64-bit jiffy for things like internal
> timers, nor for uptime tracking.
> Timers have well behaving constructs to use 32-bit jiffy quite
> successfully, and 64-bit values, especially atomicish, in 32-bit
> register-poor machines (i386) are damn difficult.
> I do have a number of machines with 100 to 300 day uptimes, all
> with "mere" 32-bit jiffy. With 1000 Hz clock that means at least
> one full wrap-around of jiffy.

Your processes will show strange start times, CPU times etc.
This will happen in 2.5 pretty soon (after 50 days uptime).

However, this is a bit cosmetic. There is a much more serious problem:

Jiffy Wrap Bugs

There were reports of machines hanging on jiffy wrap.
This is typically a result of incorrect jiffy use in some driver.
Ask Tim - he is hunting those problems regularly, but he is outnumbered
by buggy driver authors. :(

There is a better solution to ensure correct jiffy wrap handling in
*ALL* kernel code: make jiffy wrap in first five minutes of uptime.
Tim has a patch for such config option. This is almost right.
This MUST NOT be a config option, it MUST be mandatory in every
kernel. Driver writers would be bitten by their own bugs and will
fix it themself. Tim, what do you think?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:32    [W:0.084 / U:1.444 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site