public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <ptb@inv.it.uc3m.es>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: uptime increases during suspend
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 21:53:29 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603271953.k2RJrTR28039@inv.it.uc3m.es> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1143484821.2168.16.camel@leatherman>

In article <1143484821.2168.16.camel@leatherman> you wrote:
>> Would it be possible to get the old behaviour back?

> Why exactly do you want this behavior? Maybe a better explanation would
> help stir this discussion.

I don't know why he wants it (uptime does not increase during
hibernation) but I want it so that I can tell if I should time out or
not on an alarm for inactivity in userspace!  The alarm should fire if
there has been no activity for a while (30s) while activity is possible.
If the machine is suspended, no activity is possible, so the alarm
should not fire.

This is to counteract sysadamins playing with system time (e.g. syncing
with a net time server after bootup) which might cause artificial time
outs. Causing a timeout has nasty consequences when, for example, your
root fs is mounted over the net via daemons that do the network to-ing
and fro-ing from userspace. The only way they have of getting an
estimate of REAL time elapsed,  without admin playing about messing
with them, is by surreptitiously snooping uptime, which more or less
represents kernel jiffies.

If you change uptime to not represente kernel jiffies, goodbye the last
hope for counting CPU time passed from userspace. False timeouts WILL
ensue, and root mounts will fail.

Peter

  reply	other threads:[~2006-03-27 19:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-03-25 15:02 uptime increases during suspend Jonathan Black
2006-03-25 15:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-03-25 15:18   ` Jonathan Black
2006-03-26 21:38     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-03-27 18:40 ` john stultz
2006-03-27 19:53   ` Peter T. Breuer [this message]
2006-03-27 20:01     ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-03-27 22:30     ` Eric Piel
2006-03-28  3:57       ` Peter T. Breuer
2006-03-27 21:37   ` Tomasz Torcz
2006-03-27 22:43   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-03-29 14:52   ` Jonathan Black
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-03-28  2:01 Peter T. Breuer

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=200603271953.k2RJrTR28039@inv.it.uc3m.es \
    --to=ptb@inv.it.uc3m.es \
    --cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
    --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