lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:01:37 +0800 From: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: max_clock of the patch "sched_clock: fix cpu_clock()" Hi, Peter, I have a question of the max_clock in below patch, commit 354879bb977e06695993435745f06a0f6d39ce2b Author: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> Date: Mon Aug 25 17:15:34 2008 +0200 sched_clock: fix cpu_clock() The original code to calculate min_clock and max_clock is, min_clock = scd->tick_gtod + delta_jiffies * TICK_NSEC; max_clock = min_clock + TICK_NSEC; Now it's changed to, min_clock = wrap_max(scd->tick_gtod, scd->clock); max_clock = scd->tick_gtod + TICK_NSEC; Is this max_clock still correct if, in a rare case, irq is disabled for many ticks? Thanks, Lin Ming -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists