On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 January 2008 02:22, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > From: john stultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > static inline cycle_t
> > -clocksource_get_cycles(struct clocksource *cs, cycle_t now)
> > +clocksource_get_basecycles(struct clocksource *cs)
> > {
On Tuesday 22 January 2008 02:22, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> From: john stultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> static inline cycle_t
> -clocksource_get_cycles(struct clocksource *cs, cycle_t now)
> +clocksource_get_basecycles(struct clocksource *cs)
> {
> - cycle_t offset = (now - cs->cycle_last) & cs->m
From: john stultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 18:39 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> I would disable preemption in clocksource_get_basecycles. We would not
> want to be scheduled out while we hold a pointer to the old array
> element.
>
> > + int num = cs->base_num;
>
> Since yo
3 matches
Mail list logo
