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]
Message-ID: <CAHmME9pOWk_ZteUZc_PT19rMn1kfYcXtmLcyAy5sncdV1tNuiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:18:50 +0200
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>,
        Sultan Alsawaf <sultan@...neltoast.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: infinite loop in read_hpet from ktime_get_boot_fast_ns

Hey Arnd, Peter,

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 4:01 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> Documentation/core-api/timekeeping.rst describes the timekeeping
> interfaces. I think what you want here is ktime_get_coarse_boottime().
>
> Note that "coarse" means "don't access the hardware clocksource"
> here, which is faster than "fast", but less accurate.
>
> This is updated as often as "jiffies_64", but is in nanosecond resolution
> and takes suspended time into account.

Oh, thanks. Indeed ktime_get_coarse_boottime seems even better. It's
perhaps a bit slower, in that it has that seqlock, but that might give
better synchronization between CPUs as well.

Peter - any immediate downside you can think of compared to local_clock()?

Jason

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ