From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Manuel Krause Subject: Re: 2.4.22pre7aa1 ;-) Mit O(1) aber leider kein pre-emption Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 07:11:48 +0200 Message-ID: <3F275394.6030200@netscape.net> References: <200307211639.32418.Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de> <3F1C090E.8020903@netscape.net> <3F1C0CDD.8070103@netscape.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------060707060100020908040409" Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <3F1C0CDD.8070103@netscape.net> List-Id: To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Dieter_N=FCtzel?= Cc: reiserfs-list --------------060707060100020908040409 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 07/21/03 17:55, Manuel Krause wrote: > On 07/21/03 17:38, Manuel Krause wrote: >=20 >> On 07/21/03 16:39, Dieter N=FCtzel wrote: >> >>> Data-logging in the works? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dieter >> >> Mmmh. ATM of .22-pre7 only "old" rml-preempt for 2.4.21-final does not=20 >> apply well on vanilla .22-pre7. But that only in=20 >> linux/arch/sh/kernel/entry.S and linux/arch/ppc/mm/tlb.c compared to=20 >> the adjusted version for -pre5. Do you really need those files for now?! >> >> Recent data-logging without quota does apply without errors on here=20 >> tough. >=20 > Heaven, sorry! I definitely don't have the O(1) in here... and no aaX... > So, this info was only for 2.4.22-pre7 plus preempt plus data-logging=20 > plus search_reada... Sorry for the inconvenience... >=20 >> But I haven't got the compile up and running yet. >> >> BTW, the HZ=3D1000 setting makes my system time get some minutes=20 >> backwards when having a longer uptime. It's solved on every bootup. I=20 >> this typical or have I missed something?! >=20 > Bye, >=20 > Manuel Yess, I missed something as I don't read LKML usually. They have too=20 much more SPAM compared to ReiserFSlist nowadays... (No kidding, but I=20 don't need LKML in its whole fashion. But great thanks to the=20 Hero-Anti-Spam-Worker of this list, Alexander Lyamin !!!, BTW, as spam=20 rate drops to ZERO.) The attached patch was posted to LKML and is supposed to solve what I=20 asked for in the last paragraph of my previous mail that stayed=20 unanswered so far. I finally found it myself last hour. Thanks and bye, Manuel --------------060707060100020908040409 Content-Type: text/plain; name="patch.mkYY.timer_compensation_1000HZ.diff" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="patch.mkYY.timer_compensation_1000HZ.diff" diff -Naurd old/kernel/timer.c linux/kernel/timer.c --- old/kernel/timer.c 2003-07-18 17:27:01.000000000 -0400 +++ linux/kernel/timer.c 2003-07-18 17:32:19.000000000 -0400 @@ -606,6 +606,15 @@ else time_adj += (time_adj >> 2) + (time_adj >> 5); #endif +#if HZ == 1000 + /* Compensate for (HZ==1000) != (1 << SHIFT_HZ). + * Add 1.5625% and 0.78125% to get 1023.4375; => only 0.05% error (p. 14) + */ + if (time_adj < 0) + time_adj -= (-time_adj >> 6) + (-time_adj >> 7); + else + time_adj += (time_adj >> 6) + (time_adj >> 7); +#endif } /* in the NTP reference this is called "hardclock()" */ --------------060707060100020908040409--