[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071201133359.2e609976@the-village.bc.nu>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:33:59 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Avoid overflows in kernel/time.c
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:20:47 +0000
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 01:33:33 +0100
> Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 04:19:51PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > When the conversion factor between jiffies and milli- or microseconds
> > > is not a single multiply or divide, as for the case of HZ == 300, we
> > > currently do a multiply followed by a divide. The intervening
> > > result, however, is subject to overflows, especially since the
> > > fraction is not simplified (for HZ == 300, we multiply by 300 and
> > > divide by 1000).
> > >...
> > > kernel/Makefile | 8 +++
> > > kernel/time.c | 29 +++++++++---
> > > kernel/timeconst.bc | 123 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 3 files changed, 152 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > > create mode 100644 kernel/timeconst.bc
> > >...
> >
> > I have read the hep text, but are the advantages of HZ == 300 really
> > visible or was this more theoretical?
>
> Its visibile for people doing PAL media processing and TV sync work.
Wake up Alan - NTSC for 300HZ, PAL is OK at 250HZ setting.
Alan
--
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