All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Reppert <repp0017@tc.umn.edu>
To: Ludootje <ludootje@linux.be>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Uptime counter
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2004 15:20:18 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1075670417.14322.9.camel@minerva> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1075673274.4047.8.camel@gax.mynet>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1109 bytes --]

On Sun, 2004-02-01 at 16:07, Ludootje wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-02-01 at 20:51, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 10:41:41PM +0200, Markus Hästbacka wrote:
> > > Hi list,
> > > I wonder does any kernel branch have a uptime counter that doesn't stop
> > > counting at 497 days? Or is a patch needed for the job to
> > > 2.{0,2,4,6} kernel?
> > 
> > Any 64 bit machine since day 1,  but also 2.6 at i386 does work.
> > 
> > > 	Markus
> > 
> > /Matti Aarnio
> 
> It's the first time I hear about the uptime being resetted after 497 days,
> why is this? Is this a mistake or are their reasons for it?

On 32-bit architectures, the uptime counter is only 32 bits wide. Each
"tick" of the counter is worth 1/HZ seconds (IIRC). So, you can get the
number of seconds this will hold with simple math (2^32 * 1/HZ, HZ
being 100 on i386). This is about 497.1 days.

Of course, on 64-bit architectures, the counter will hold 4 billion
times that, which is about as long as the Earth has existed. Apparently
2.6 has come up with a way to deal with this on 32-bit architectures.

Matt

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2004-02-01 21:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-02-01 20:41 Uptime counter Markus Hästbacka
2004-02-01 20:51 ` Matti Aarnio
2004-02-01 22:07   ` Ludootje
2004-02-01 21:20     ` Matthew Reppert [this message]
2004-02-01 20:52 ` Måns Rullgård
2004-02-01 21:02 ` Christian Borntraeger
2004-02-01 21:16   ` Markus Hästbacka
2004-02-01 21:27     ` David Weinehall
2004-02-01 21:34       ` Markus Hästbacka
2004-02-01 21:44         ` David Weinehall
2004-02-01 22:07           ` Markus Hästbacka
2004-02-01 22:19             ` David Weinehall
2004-02-01 22:42               ` Markus Hästbacka
2004-02-01 21:56     ` Guillermo Menguez Alvarez
2004-02-01 22:36     ` Paul Jakma
2004-02-01 22:59       ` Markus Hästbacka
2004-02-01 23:04         ` David Weinehall
2004-02-02  7:20           ` Markus Hästbacka
2004-02-02  7:24             ` David Weinehall
2004-02-02  8:59               ` Markus Hästbacka
2004-02-01 23:47       ` Wakko Warner
2004-02-01 21:33   ` Tomasz Torcz
2004-02-01 22:10   ` Ludootje
2004-02-02 17:54   ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2004-02-02 18:37     ` Mike Fedyk
2004-02-04 16:24   ` Bill Davidsen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1075670417.14322.9.camel@minerva \
    --to=repp0017@tc.umn.edu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ludootje@linux.be \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.