Re: [RFC][PATCH] NTP shift_right cleanup (v. A1)

Hi,

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, john stultz wrote:

> > I checked and this actually generates worse code.
> 
> Well, if I drop the abs() and use:
> 	if ((time_phase >= FINENSEC) || (time_phase <= -FINENSEC))
> 
> It looks pretty close in my test. Is that cool with you?

I think it doesn't hurt to keep it for now, there are other ways to get 
rid of it (e.g. reducing tick_nsec so time_adj is always positive).

bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [RFC][PATCH] NTP shift_right cleanup (v. A1)
    • From: john stultz <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] NTP shift_right cleanup (v. A1)
    • From: Roman Zippel <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC][PATCH] NTP shift_right cleanup (v. A1)
    • From: john stultz <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: PCI driver
• Next by Date: Re: forced to CONFIG_PM=y
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC][PATCH] NTP shift_right cleanup (v. A1)
• Next by thread: [RFC][PATCH] NTP shift_right cleanup (v. A2)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]