Hi Thomas,
On 5/16/07, Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
Francis,
On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 10:47 +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
> My question is about the clock resolution field which is equal to 1ns.
> How is this possible since my timer's frequency is only 100Mhz ?
you are right. It is a bit strange. The resolution info is not really
reflecting the clock event source capability. I look if there is a sane
solution for that.
Doesn't that make hrtimer_get_res() and its callers buggy since they
return this 1ns value which is not reflecting the correct clock event
capability ?
Another question about the output of '/proc/timer_list':
[...]
active timers:
#0: <c03fde10>, tick_sched_timer, S:01
# expires at 64696546875000 nsecs [in 2514469 nsecs]
.expires_next : 64696546875000 nsecs
[...]
Doesn't the 2 expire time lines give the same information ? If so,
couldn't we merge them into : ".expires_next : 64696546875000 nsecs
[in 2514469 nsecs]" ?
Thanks
--
Francis
-
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]
