Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 16:47:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cputime_t patches broke RLIMIT_CPU
In-Reply-To: <200501200026.j0K0QFst021029@magilla.sf.frob.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0501191642230.8178@ppc970.osdl.org>
References: <200501200026.j0K0QFst021029@magilla.sf.frob.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1046
Lines: 23


On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Roland McGrath wrote:
> 
> Yes, that's how it was done before.  The patch I just posted was intended
> to fix the apparent typo without getting any deeper.  Below is an untested
> alternate patch to restore the old behavior under the new macro regime.

Thanks, this one looks good. I have this nagging feeling that the test for 
"every second" should be doable by using a multiply (ie do a
secs_to_cputime(secs) and see if it's smaller than "total - cputime") 
rather than doing the divide that is implied by "cputime_to_secs()", but I 
can't really bring myself to care, and if anything, that test for "did we 
go into the next whole second" really is pretty obscure anyway.

So I can't see anything wrong with this. Anybody else? Going, going..

		Linus "almost gone" Torvalds
-
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/