[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20111221155922.1d5688a6.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 15:59:22 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Artem S. Tashkinov" <t.artem@...lcity.com>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [resend PATCH for 3.2] procfs: do not confuse jiffies with
cputime64_t
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 00:55:07 +0100
Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
>
> > Also, in include/asm-generic/cputime.h we have:
> >
> > #define usecs_to_cputime64(__msecs) nsecs_to_jiffies64((__msecs) * 1000)
> >
> > But it would be neater to have used nsecs_to_cputime64(), surely.
>
> The procfs interface wants to convert usecs to cputime64, but generic
> cputime does not have usecs_to_jiffies64. Once someone writes the
> latter it can be used here.
>
That doesn't address my suggestion.
I'm saying that this:
#define usecs_to_cputime64(__msecs) nsecs_to_jiffies64((__msecs) * 1000)
should have instead been
#define usecs_to_cputime64(__msecs) nsecs_to_cputime64((__msecs) * 1000)
--
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