Re: [PATCH] Introduce jiffies_32 and related compare functions

From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 04:47:14 +0100

> I doubt being able to extend the expiration of a dst above 2^32
> ticks (49 days if HZ=1000, 198 days if HZ=250) is worth the ram
> wastage.

And this doesn't apply for all jiffies uses because? :-)

That's the point I'm trying to make and get a discussion on.
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] Introduce jiffies_32 and related compare functions
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] Introduce jiffies_32 and related compare functions
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Introduce jiffies_32 and related compare functions
    • From: David Miller <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Introduce jiffies_32 and related compare functions
    • From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH][SCSI]: Save some bytes in struct scsi_target
• Next by Date: ieee80211 sleeping in invalid context
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Introduce jiffies_32 and related compare functions
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Introduce jiffies_32 and related compare functions
• 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]