From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow within 50 days
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 16:34:48 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141006193448.GB8238@khazad-dum.debian.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1410061726510.4383@nanos>
> > Tools expect the number of interrupt to increase linearly and not jump by
> > 2^32 once in awhile. There are functions in the kernel (/proc/stat) that
...
> I understand that, I just wonder why nobody noticed before. It's been
> that way forever :)
Any proper tool that interfaces to snmp-like counters expects and deals with
worse: sudden counter resets.
And it has been that way forever :-) So people who use such tools would
hardly notice any warp-arounds...
So, the question becomes: which tools are misbehaving? Maybe they should
adopt snmp-like counter reset detection for peak filtering, and we could
leave 32-bit alone, and increase the counter size only on for 64-bit?
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-06 19:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-03 9:45 Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow within 50 days Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 10:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-03 11:54 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 12:03 ` Richard Cochran
2014-10-03 12:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-03 12:17 ` Richard Cochran
2014-10-03 14:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 21:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-05 23:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 23:57 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-10-06 8:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 10:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-06 13:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 15:16 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-06 15:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 19:34 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [this message]
2014-10-06 15:31 ` David Lang
2014-10-06 19:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-05 23:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-10-06 7:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-06 10:49 ` David Lang
2014-10-06 12:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-10-03 12:15 ` Paul Bolle
2014-10-03 12:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2014-10-04 10:26 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
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=20141006193448.GB8238@khazad-dum.debian.net \
--to=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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