From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu (mx2.mail.elte.hu [157.181.151.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9246467C01 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2006 03:24:04 +1100 (EST) Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 17:23:00 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Sergei Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.18-rt7: fix more issues with 32-bit cycles_t in latency_trace.c (take 3) Message-ID: <20061204162300.GA23800@elte.hu> References: <200611132252.58818.sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com> <457326A2.2020402@ru.mvista.com> <20061204095131.GE7872@elte.hu> <4574149B.5070602@ru.mvista.com> <20061204153949.GA9350@elte.hu> <45744AF5.2040508@ru.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <45744AF5.2040508@ru.mvista.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwalker@mvista.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , * Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > > /* check for buggy clocks, handling wrap for 32-bit clocks */ > >- if (TYPE_EQUAL(cycles_t, unsigned long)) { > >+ if (TYPE_EQUAL(cycle_t, unsigned long)) { > > if (time_after((unsigned long)T1, (unsigned long)T2)) > > printk("bug: %08lx < %08lx!\n", > > (unsigned long)T2, (unsigned long)T1); > > This earlier fix by Kevin woulnd't have sense anymore with cycle_t... yeah, indeed - i've zapped this one too. basically, what i'd like is the 32-bit clocks/cycles be handled intelligently, and not adding to the cruft that already is in kernel/latency_tracing.c. Ingo