| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <38b2ab8a0705160042o350d429ct72c43749ff6bcbb8@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 09:42:02 +0200 From: "Francis Moreau" <francis.moro@...il.com> To: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu> Subject: Re: clockevent questions Hi Thomas, On 5/16/07, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote: > Francis, > > On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 10:47 +0200, Francis Moreau wrote: > > My question is about the clock resolution field which is equal to 1ns. > > How is this possible since my timer's frequency is only 100Mhz ? > > you are right. It is a bit strange. The resolution info is not really > reflecting the clock event source capability. I look if there is a sane > solution for that. > Doesn't that make hrtimer_get_res() and its callers buggy since they return this 1ns value which is not reflecting the correct clock event capability ? Another question about the output of '/proc/timer_list': [...] active timers: #0: <c03fde10>, tick_sched_timer, S:01 # expires at 64696546875000 nsecs [in 2514469 nsecs] .expires_next : 64696546875000 nsecs [...] Doesn't the 2 expire time lines give the same information ? If so, couldn't we merge them into : ".expires_next : 64696546875000 nsecs [in 2514469 nsecs]" ? Thanks -- Francis - 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