[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5ff4a1e50809010457l7051b7e8vc7f86d68ae42e529@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 12:57:29 +0100
From: "Matt Fleming" <mattjfleming@...glemail.com>
To: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ktime_set() does not check for nanoseconds > one second
2008/9/1 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>:
> On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Matt Fleming wrote:
>>
>> is it intentional that ktime_set() does not check whether the
>> nanoseconds argument is greater than the number of nanoseconds in a
>> second? I've run into a problem where a value of 1600000000
>> nanoseconds was passed as an argument to ktime_set() and the return
>> value was then used in a ktime_add() call, which returned an incorrect
>> result. Should the caller of ktime_set() make this check or is it
>> possible to move this logic in to the function itself?
>
> Yeah, a check for this in ktime_set() might make sense. Currently it's
> up to the programmer to provide sane values. :)
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>
How about the attached patch?
Matt
diff --git a/include/linux/ktime.h b/include/linux/ktime.h
index ce59832..7c0ad35 100644
--- a/include/linux/ktime.h
+++ b/include/linux/ktime.h
@@ -150,7 +150,19 @@ static inline ktime_t timeval_to_ktime(struct timeval tv)
/* Set a ktime_t variable to a value in sec/nsec representation: */
static inline ktime_t ktime_set(const long secs, const unsigned long nsecs)
{
- return (ktime_t) { .tv = { .sec = secs, .nsec = nsecs } };
+ ktime_t res = { .tv = { .sec = secs, .nsec = nsecs }};;
+
+ /*
+ * performance trick: the (u32) -NSEC gives 0x00000000Fxxxxxxx
+ * so we subtract NSEC_PER_SEC and add 1 to the upper 32 bit.
+ *
+ * it's equivalent to:
+ * tv.nsec -= NSEC_PER_SEC
+ * tv.sec ++;
+ */
+ if (nsecs >= NSEC_PER_SEC)
+ res.tv64 += (u32)-NSEC_PER_SEC;
+ return res;
}
/**
View attachment "ktime-check-for-seconds-in-nanoseconds.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists