[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1167767185.3141.15.camel@localhost>
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 11:46:24 -0800
From: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
To: Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] HZ free ntp
On Mon, 2007-01-01 at 19:29 +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 December 2006 02:54, john stultz wrote:
>
> > And here would be the follow on patch (again *untested*) for
> > CONFIG_NO_HZ slowing the time accumulation down to once per second.
>
> Changing it to one creates a potential problem with calling second_overflow().
> It should be called every NTP_INTERVAL_FREQ times, but occasionally it's off
> by one (when xtime is close to a full second and the tick length is different
> from 1sec). At a higher frequency that's not much of a problem, but at one it
> means second_overflow() is occasionally called twice a second or skipped for
> a second. Usually the error should be quite small, but sometimes it can be
> significant.
> So in this case the loop in update_wall_time() should rather look like this:
>
> while (offset >= clock->cycle_interval) {
> ...
> second_overflow();
> while (clock->xtime_nsec >= (u64)NSEC_PER_SEC << clock->shift) {
> clock->xtime_nsec -= (u64)NSEC_PER_SEC << clock->shift;
> xtime.tv_sec++;
> }
> ...
> }
>
> (Also note the change from "if" to "while".)
Ah, good catch! Thank you, I'll add that, retest and send it to akpm.
thanks
-john
-
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