From: George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>
To: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Cc: Tim Schmielau <tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de>,
john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Petri Kaukasoina <kaukasoi@elektroni.ee.tut.fi>,
albert@users.sourceforge.net, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
voland@dmz.com.pl, nicolas.george@ens.fr,
david+powerix@blue-labs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: boot time, process start time, and NOW time
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 00:31:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <41381DC6.8050001@mvista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87wtzct47h.fsf@ibmpc.myhome.or.jp>
OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> George Anzinger <george@mvista.com> writes:
>
>
>>>The cause of this is
>>> INITIAL_JIFFIES % HZ (4294667296 % 1000)
>>>because INITIAL_JIFFIES is unsigned long.
>>>So, I guessed this is not intention.
>>>Looks like this should be (-300*1000) % 1000.
>>
>>What "should be"?
>
>
> in time_init(), and hpet_time_init(),
> xtime.tv_nsec = (INITIAL_JIFFIES % HZ) * (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ);
> should be
> xtime.tv_nsec = ((long)INITIAL_JIFFIES % HZ) * (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ);
>
> because
> (INITIAL_JIFFIES % HZ) * (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ) == 296000000
> and
> ((long)INITIAL_JIFFIES % HZ) * (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ) == 0
It is possible that I am missing something here, but I just don't see that it
matters. If the wall clock is set jiffies is not changed so there is no implied
or actual alignment between these two.
Is there a calculation in the system that would differ if this were changed?
--
George Anzinger george@mvista.com
High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-03 7:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-22 23:57 boot time, process start time, and NOW time Albert Cahalan
2004-06-28 17:56 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2004-08-16 19:41 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-16 21:49 ` john stultz
2004-08-16 23:08 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-16 23:56 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-17 0:21 ` john stultz
2004-08-17 0:37 ` George Anzinger
2004-08-17 0:49 ` john stultz
2004-08-17 0:31 ` George Anzinger
2004-08-16 22:32 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-17 1:26 ` George Anzinger
2004-08-16 23:08 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-17 1:54 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2004-08-17 2:03 ` Lee Revell
2004-08-17 20:52 ` George Anzinger
2004-08-17 6:56 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-17 20:07 ` john stultz
2004-08-17 20:13 ` [RFC] New timeofday implementation proposal john stultz
2004-08-17 20:58 ` [RFC] New timeofday code john stultz
2004-09-01 23:16 ` [RFC] New timeofday implementation proposal Christoph Lameter
2004-08-16 23:24 ` boot time, process start time, and NOW time Albert Cahalan
2004-08-17 19:00 ` john stultz
2004-08-17 17:41 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-17 20:58 ` john stultz
2004-08-17 20:25 ` [PATCH] " Tim Schmielau
2004-08-17 22:24 ` George Anzinger
2004-08-17 22:37 ` john stultz
2004-08-17 23:07 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-18 0:11 ` john stultz
2004-08-17 22:19 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-18 1:09 ` john stultz
2004-08-17 22:45 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-18 7:42 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-19 19:15 ` Petri Kaukasoina
2004-08-26 11:04 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-26 12:07 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-30 23:00 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-30 23:38 ` john stultz
2004-08-31 0:37 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-31 0:49 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-31 0:45 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-31 1:23 ` john stultz
2004-08-31 1:34 ` john stultz
2004-08-31 6:07 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-08-31 19:27 ` George Anzinger
2004-08-31 20:56 ` john stultz
2004-08-31 21:10 ` David Ford
2004-09-02 20:39 ` George Anzinger
2004-09-01 19:14 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2004-09-02 20:58 ` George Anzinger
2004-09-02 21:38 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2004-09-03 0:59 ` George Anzinger
2004-09-03 3:35 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2004-09-03 7:31 ` George Anzinger [this message]
2004-09-03 7:51 ` Tim Schmielau
2004-09-03 7:15 ` Tim Schmielau
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=41381DC6.8050001@mvista.com \
--to=george@mvista.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=albert@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=david+powerix@blue-labs.org \
--cc=hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kaukasoi@elektroni.ee.tut.fi \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.george@ens.fr \
--cc=tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de \
--cc=voland@dmz.com.pl \
/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