Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 07:19:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 07:19:11 -0500 Received: from bay-bridge.veritas.com ([143.127.3.10]:30912 "EHLO mtvmime01.veritas.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 07:19:10 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 12:31:02 +0000 (GMT) From: Hugh Dickins X-X-Sender: hugh@localhost.localdomain To: Kai Germaschewski cc: Andrew Morton , Subject: Re: [PATCH] elapsed times wrap In-Reply-To: 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: 1126 Lines: 28 On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Kai Germaschewski wrote: > On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > > Userspace shows huge elapsed time across jiffies wrap: with USER_HZ > > less then HZ, sys_times needs jiffies_64 to calculate its retval. > > That makes me wonder, aren't all uses of jiffies_to_clock_t() broken then? I believe you're right, but it's less obvious to me that the other uses really want fixing e.g. would we be happy to maintain utime,stime,cutime,cstime as 64-bit on a 32-bit machine? > Well, all which take an absolute time as an argument at least. Yes, it's much more important to fix those where userspace habitually takes the difference. That certainly applies to the return value from sys_times, but I don't see any other cases as clear (though userspace may have good reason to take the difference of any of them). Perhaps a procps expert can advise? Hugh - 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/