From: Eric Piel <Eric.Piel@tremplin-utc.net>
To: "Peter T. Breuer" <ptb@inv.it.uc3m.es>
Cc: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: uptime increases during suspend
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:30:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44286783.9000709@tremplin-utc.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200603271953.k2RJrTR28039@inv.it.uc3m.es>
27.03.2006 21:53, Peter T. Breuer wrote/a écrit:
> 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.
It seems that what you are really looking for in your application is a
monotonic clock. Linux has such thing since few releases. Using
CLOCK_MONOTONIC (cf "man 3 clock_gettime") may look much less hacky than
using the uptime ;-)
Now... concerning the suspend effect on this clock, I don't know. It's
probably the same problem as uptime: no official semantic has ever been
stated yet... Does anyone know?
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-27 22:31 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
2006-03-27 20:01 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-03-27 22:30 ` Eric Piel [this message]
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=44286783.9000709@tremplin-utc.net \
--to=eric.piel@tremplin-utc.net \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ptb@inv.it.uc3m.es \
/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