linux-kernel - Re: Negative values in /proc/latency

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 3 Feb 2009 21:55:52 -0800
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Corrado Zoccolo <czoccolo@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Negative values in /proc/latency_stats

On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 21:46:09 -0800

> > + * (note: the average latency is the acummulated latency deviced
> > by the number
> > + * of times)
> 
> I was surprised at this.  Is the stack backtracer sufficiently
> reliable/repeatable for this to work?

yep it is, at least on x86 and x86-64.

> 
> > + * Negative latencies (caused by time going backwards) are also
> > explicitly
> > + * skipped.
> 
> Are we sure that this was the cause of the problem?

not 100%, but if you add only positive numbers..... the only other
option is an overflow.. but that would be such a huge latency that that
is not very believable.

> 
> Which time source is the caller using here, and why is it going
> backwards?

scheduler clock.


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/