Re: [PATCH] 2.6.18-rt7: fix more issues with 32-bit cycles_t in latency_trace.c (take 3)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hello.

Ingo Molnar wrote:

i'd suggest to redo it - but please keep it simple and clean. Those dozens of casts to u64 are quite ugly.

Alas, there's *nothing* I can do about it with 32-bit cycles_t. [...]

there's *always* a way to do such things more cleanly - such as the patch below. Could you try to fix it up for 32-bit cycles_t platforms? I bet the hackery will be limited to now() and maybe the conversion routines, instead of spreading all around latency_trace.c.

I'm not sure what you want me to do... You've switched to clocksource specific cycle_t (which is u64), do you want me to use the clocksource interface to get the cycles from now on?

Index: linux/kernel/latency_trace.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/latency_trace.c
+++ linux/kernel/latency_trace.c
[...]
@@ -1721,7 +1722,7 @@ check_critical_timing(int cpu, struct cp
 	T2 = get_monotonic_cycles();
/* check for buggy clocks, handling wrap for 32-bit clocks */
-	if (TYPE_EQUAL(cycles_t, unsigned long)) {
+	if (TYPE_EQUAL(cycle_t, unsigned long)) {
 		if (time_after((unsigned long)T1, (unsigned long)T2))
 			printk("bug: %08lx < %08lx!\n",
 				(unsigned long)T2, (unsigned long)T1);

   This earlier fix by Kevin woulnd't have sense anymore with cycle_t...

WBR, Sergei
-
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/

[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]
  Powered by Linux