On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:09:53AM -0700, David Ahern wrote: > On 12/20/13, 5:27 AM, Joseph Schuchart wrote: > >I know this comes late, but: As far as I can see, your change does not > >preserve the logic of the code I suggested. The idea was to first gather > >all the maximum timestamps of all cpus (that is, the last timestamp seen > >on each cpu) and then determine the minimum of these maxima. These are > >two distinct steps that I think cannot be combined in one update. Your > > A number of people have reported similar problems -- timestamps > below last flush time. This approach would solve that problem for > data processed from files, so it would be a good improvement.
Could it be near what you're looking for? https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/18/53 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
