From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 05:09:23 +0100
> We definitly *like* being able to use bigger timeouts on 64bits platforms.
>
> Not that they are mandatory since the same application should run fine on
> 32bits kernel. But as the standard type for 'tick timestamps' is 'unsigned
> long', a change would be invasive.
>
> Maybe some applications are now relying on being able to
> sleep()/select()/poll() for periods > 30 days and only run on 64
> bits kernels.
I think one possible target would be struct timer, at least
in theory.
There is also a line of reasoning that says that on 64-bit
platforms we have some flexibility to set HZ very large, if
we wanted to at some point, and going to 32-bit jiffies
storage for some things may eliminate that kind of flexibility.
Just some food for thought...
-
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]
