All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow within 50 days
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 14:15:12 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1412338512.19413.85.camel@x220> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410030653040.8496@gentwo.org>

On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 06:54 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> > > Is this the way its intended or should the counters be expanded to 64 bit?
> >
> > There is no reason why we cannot or should not expand them.
> 
> Ok here is a patch to do just that:
> 
> 
> Subject: Increase irq counters to 64 bit
> 
> 
> Irq counters can overflow easily if they are just 32 bit.
> 
> For example the timer interrupt occurs 1000 times per second, so
> it is predictable that the timer interrupt will overflow in
> 
> 
> 2^ 32 / 1000 [interrupts per second] / 86400 [seconds in a day]
> 
> which results in 46 days.

dc -e "1 k 2 32 ^ 1000 / 86400 / p"
49.7

(That was the number I remembered from stories about a ancient Windows
lockup.)

> Other irq counters for devices may wrap even faster for example
> those for high speed networking devices.
> 
> This patch is needed to avoid the counter overflow by increasing
> the counters to 64 bit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>


Paul Bolle



  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-10-03 12:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-03  9:45 Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow within 50 days Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 10:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-03 11:54   ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 12:03     ` Richard Cochran
2014-10-03 12:07       ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 12:17         ` Richard Cochran
2014-10-03 14:04           ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 21:49         ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-05 23:24           ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 23:57             ` Eric Dumazet
2014-10-06  8:06             ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 10:22               ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-06 13:01                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 15:16                   ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-06 15:28                     ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 19:34                       ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2014-10-06 15:31                     ` David Lang
2014-10-06 19:45                       ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 23:59           ` Eric Dumazet
2014-10-06  7:54             ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 10:49           ` David Lang
2014-10-06 12:28             ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-03 12:15     ` Paul Bolle [this message]
2014-10-03 12:23       ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-04 10:26         ` Bernd Petrovitsch

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=1412338512.19413.85.camel@x220 \
    --to=pebolle@tiscali.nl \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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.