[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1306977263.11492.32.camel@work-vm>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 18:14:23 -0700
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rtc: Avoid accumulating time drift in
suspend/resume
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 17:54 -0700, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:07 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:
> > + /*
> > + * Since these RTC suspend/resume handlers are not called
> > + * at the very end of suspend or the start of resume,
> > + * some run-time may pass on either sides of the sleep time
> > + * so subtract kernel run-time between rtc_suspend to rtc_resume
> > + * to keep things accurate.
> > + */
> > + sleep_time = timespec_sub(sleep_time,
> > + timespec_sub(new_system, old_system));
>
> What happens if sleep_time is negative? I think this need to be
> clamped to 0 to avoid backwards jumps when you wake up more than once
> without the rtc advancing.
Good thought! Although that will be easier to catch in
timekeeping_inject_sleeptime(), so I might add it there.
Thanks for the review!
-john
--
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