linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] exponential update_wall

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:11:50 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] exponential update_wall_time


* Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:

> > > add up to 1 second. Right now we slice it into HZ steps, but this 
> > > can be rather easily changed now.
> > 
> > Right off, it seems it would then make sense to make the ntp "ticks" 
> > one second in length. And set the interval values accordingly.
> > 
> > However, there might be clocksources that are incapable of running 
> > freely for a full second w/o overflowing. In that case we would need 
> > to set the interval values and the ntp tick length accordingly. It 
> > seems we need some sort of interface to ntp to define that base tick 
> > length. Would that be ok by you?
> 
> I don't see how you want to do this without some rather complex 
> calculations. I doubt this will make anything easier.

lets figure out a way to solve this in some manner - the loop of 
thousands of function calls on dynticks didnt look too well. Millions of 
kids will be grateful for it :-)

	Ingo
-
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/