[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A8B14AB.3020707@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:52:59 -0500
From: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@...com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Dynamic Tick: Allow 32-bit machines to sleep for
more than 2.15 seconds
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/linux/clockchips.h b/include/linux/clockchips.h
>> index 3a1dbba..8154bc6 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/clockchips.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/clockchips.h
>> @@ -77,8 +77,8 @@ enum clock_event_nofitiers {
>> struct clock_event_device {
>> const char *name;
>> unsigned int features;
>> - unsigned long max_delta_ns;
>> - unsigned long min_delta_ns;
>> + unsigned long long max_delta_ns;
>> + unsigned long long min_delta_ns;
>
> Can we please use u64 for this ?
John brought this up as well. There was some discussion sometime back
about this. I did get some feedback that u64 was a different type
between ppc64 and x86-64 which was causing problems with printk. The
above variables are also used with printk in the kernel today.
See the following email:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=124041426203283&w=2
I am not sure if this is still the case and safer to stick with
long-long for now. Let me know your thoughts.
Cheers
Jon
--
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