Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:10:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:10:44 -0500 Received: from gans.physik3.uni-rostock.de ([139.30.44.2]:27317 "EHLO gans.physik3.uni-rostock.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 11:10:42 -0500 Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:17:37 +0100 (CET) From: Tim Schmielau To: "Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe" cc: , Subject: Re: /proc/stat interface and 32bit jiffies / kernel_stat In-Reply-To: <20021115142244.GG5957@darkside.ddts.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1155 Lines: 32 On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote: [system idle time will overflow after about 497/NR_CPUS days] > > Since it should not be a big problem to fix this, to > at least reduce the problem back to the 500 days > jiffies-overflow problem, I'd suggest to do so. > > No need to mention, that 64bit jiffies and statistics on > all platforms at all would be great :) 2.5 has 64 bit jiffies (but not (yet?) 64 bit statistics). A patch for 2.4 that fixes the overflow in proc_stat as well as introducing 63 bit jiffies is at http://www.physik3.uni-rostock.de/tim/kernel/2.4/jiffies64-20.patch.gz > > Btw... Could anybody please explain me the problems to > expect while a jiffies overflow? Would a kernel possibly > survive this at all and if, what's the chance to? :) "ps" will report processes started before the jiffies wrap as being started in the future, but this won't do any harm. Tim - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/