From: Varun Chandramohan <varunc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, sri@us.ibm.com, dlstevens@us.ibm.com,
varuncha@in.ibm.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Add new timeval_to_sec function
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:10:28 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46A59EDC.4060906@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46A59AAF.6090605@hartkopp.net>
Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
> Varun Chandramohan wrote:
>
>> Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Varun Chandramohan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> + * timeval_to_sec - Convert timeval to seconds
>>>> + * @tv: pointer to the timeval variable to be converted
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Returns the seconds representation of timeval parameter.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static inline time_t timeval_to_sec(const struct timeval *tv)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return (tv->tv_sec + (tv->tv_usec + 500000)/1000000);
>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I don't think you should round down timeout values.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Can you elaborate on that? As per the RFC of MIB ,we need only seconds
>> granularity. Taking that as the case i dont understand why round down
>> should not be done?
>>
>>
>
> When you like to create any timeout based on your calculated value, you
> might run into the problem that your calculated value is set to _zero_
> even if there was "some time" before the conversion. This might probably
> not what you indented to get.
>
> So what about rounding up with
>
> return (tv->tv_sec + (tv->tv_usec + 999999)/1000000);
>
> ???
>
>
This can done. Is this what you were ref to me, Patrick?
> Btw. isn't here already any solution based on ktime conversions?
>
>
AFAIK there isint any conversion function to secs. Correct me if iam wrong.
But we can have a function or macro to do this conversion.
> Regards,
> Oliver
>
>
>
Regards,
Varun
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-24 6:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-23 4:41 [PATCH 2/4] Add new timeval_to_sec function Varun Chandramohan
2007-07-23 11:24 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-24 4:15 ` Varun Chandramohan
2007-07-24 6:22 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2007-07-24 6:40 ` Varun Chandramohan [this message]
2007-07-24 13:43 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-07-24 13:50 ` Varun Chandramohan
2007-07-24 19:54 ` David Stevens
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=46A59EDC.4060906@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=varunc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dlstevens@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
--cc=sri@us.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=varuncha@in.ibm.com \
/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.