Re: [PATCH] 498+ days uptime

Alexander Kjeldaas (astor@guardian.no)
Wed, 26 Aug 1998 13:57:17 +0200


On Mon, Aug 24, 1998 at 11:32:46PM -0500, Mitchell Blank Jr wrote:
>
> I think using 64-bit counters on i386 is unreasonable. These counters
> are often incremented in extremely performance-critical areas. Using
> a polled system where the kernel remembers when 32-bit counters overflowed
> might be workable.
>

I think this is the best thing to do for i386. No cost, all benefits.
However, I think you could use the timer interface. Just make a
'check-wrap' function and associate each 'struct _longcounter' with a
timer. The 'timeout' is different for each counter so it should scale
better than a single linked list.

astor

-- 
 Alexander Kjeldaas, Guardian Networks AS, Trondheim, Norway
 http://www.guardian.no/

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html