[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090508160142.ad89944f.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 16:01:42 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ron <ron@...ian.org>
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix for sched_clock() when using jiffies
On Sat, 9 May 2009 05:34:44 +0930
Ron <ron@...ian.org> wrote:
>
> Account for the initial offset to the jiffy count.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ron Lee <ron@...ian.org>
>
> ---
> kernel/sched_clock.c | 3 ++-
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched_clock.c b/kernel/sched_clock.c
> index a0b0852..a1567b1 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched_clock.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched_clock.c
> @@ -37,7 +37,8 @@
> */
> unsigned long long __attribute__((weak)) sched_clock(void)
> {
> - return (unsigned long long)jiffies * (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ);
> + return (unsigned long long)(jiffies - INITIAL_JIFFIES)
> + * (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ);
> }
>
> static __read_mostly int sched_clock_running;
Why? I assume that you encountered some problem which was fixed
by this patch. What was that problem?
--
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