From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicholas Miell Subject: Re: [take12 0/3] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism. Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:18:50 -0700 Message-ID: <1156321130.2476.275.camel@entropy> References: <20060823065659.GC24787@2ka.mipt.ru> <20060823000758.5ebed7dd.akpm@osdl.org> <20060823.003516.30182824.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: akpm@osdl.org, johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru, sundell.software@gmail.com, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, zach.brown@oracle.com, hch@infradead.org Return-path: Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net ([216.148.227.152]:64505 "EHLO rwcrmhc12.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932418AbWHWITM (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 04:19:12 -0400 To: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20060823.003516.30182824.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 00:35 -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Andrew Morton > Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:07:58 -0700 > > > I wonder whether designing-in a millisecond granularity is the right thing > > to do. If in a few years the kernel is running tickless with high-res clock > > interrupt sources, that might look a bit lumpy. > > > > Switching it to a __u64 nanosecond counter would be basically free on > > 64-bit machines, and not very expensive on 32-bit, no? > > If it ends up in a structure we'll need to use the "aligned_u64" type > in order to avoid problems with 32-bit x86 binaries running on 64-bit > kernels. Perhaps struct timespec64 { uint64_t tv_sec __attribute__((aligned(8))); uint32_t tv_nsec; } with a snide remark about gcc in the comments? -- Nicholas Miell