From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Josef Sipek <jsipek@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [patch 11/13] s390: instruction processing damage handling.
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 11:24:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1146216285.5138.1.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060428083903.GA11819@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 10:39 +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > +++ linux-2.6-patched/drivers/s390/s390mach.c 2006-04-24 16:47:28.000000000 +0200
> > ...
> > > +#define MAX_IPD_TIME (5 * 60 * 100 * 1000) /* 5 minutes */
> >
> > I'm no s390 expert, but shouldn't the above use something like HZ?
>
> Using HZ here feels just wrong to me. MAX_IPD_TIME has nothing to do with the
> timer frequency. In this case it's used to tell if there were 30 machine
> checks within the last 5 minutes (in a usec granularity). It's just by
> accident that this could be expressed using HZ.
> (5 * 60 * USEC_PER_SEC) would probably look better...
Using HZ would be wrong. The check that uses MAX_IPD_TIME compares it
against the result of a get_clock() call. That uses the TOD Clock
directly, there is no dependency on HZ.
--
blue skies,
Martin.
Martin Schwidefsky
Linux for zSeries Development & Services
IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-28 9:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-24 15:05 [patch 11/13] s390: instruction processing damage handling Martin Schwidefsky
2006-04-24 23:58 ` Andrew Morton
2006-04-25 20:14 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-04-28 7:33 ` Josef Sipek
2006-04-28 8:39 ` Heiko Carstens
2006-04-28 9:24 ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]
2006-04-28 13:43 ` Paulo Marques
2006-04-28 14:53 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2006-04-28 16:46 ` Heiko Carstens
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=1146216285.5138.1.camel@localhost \
--to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=jsipek@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox