Re: [patch] fix delay_tsc (was Re: delay_tsc(): inefficient delay loop (2.6.16-mm1))

> I'm running a system with this applied now.  I think there are still
> problems if someone uses huge delays, though.  What keeps someone from
> trying to delay for > 2^31 cycles?

You shouldn't. The caller has a compile time check for that. And if you pass 
in dynamic values you get what you deserve.

-Andi
-
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:
- [patch] fix delay_tsc (was Re: delay_tsc(): inefficient delay loop (2.6.16-mm1))
  - From: Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] KABI example conversion and cleanup
Next by Date: Re: PI patch against 2.6.16-rt9
Previous by thread: [patch] fix delay_tsc (was Re: delay_tsc(): inefficient delay loop (2.6.16-mm1))
Next by thread: Re: [patch] fix delay_tsc (was Re: delay_tsc(): inefficient delay loop (2.6.16-mm1))
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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