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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 7 Dec 2007 22:13:05 +1100
From:	Nick Piggin <>
To:	Ingo Molnar <>
Cc:	Stefano Brivio <>,
	Robert Love <>,,
	Dave Jones <>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>, Michael Buesch <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Len Brown <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scheduler: fix x86 regression in native_sched_clock

On Friday 07 December 2007 19:45, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Stefano Brivio <> wrote:
> > This patch fixes a regression introduced by:
> >
> > commit bb29ab26863c022743143f27956cc0ca362f258c
> > Author: Ingo Molnar <>
> > Date:   Mon Jul 9 18:51:59 2007 +0200
> >
> > This caused the jiffies counter to leap back and forth on cpufreq
> > changes on my x86 box. I'd say that we can't always assume that TSC
> > does "small errors" only, when marked unstable. On cpufreq changes
> > these errors can be huge.
> ah, printk_clock() still uses sched_clock(), not jiffies. So it's not
> the jiffies counter that goes back and forth, it's sched_clock() - so
> this is a printk timestamps anomaly, not related to jiffies. I thought
> we have fixed this bug in the printk code already: sched_clock() is a
> 'raw' interface that should not be used directly - the proper interface
> is cpu_clock(cpu).

It's a single CPU box, so sched_clock() jumping would still be
problematic, no?

My patch should fix the worst cpufreq sched_clock jumping issue
I think.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists