On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 12:36 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * John Stultz wrote:
>
>> + u64 nsecps;
>
> What does the 'ps' postfix stand for? It's not obvious (to me).
>
I guess that nsecps stands for "nanoseconds per second", although the
code appears
On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 12:36 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * John Stultz wrote:
>
>> + u64 nsecps;
>
> What does the 'ps' postfix stand for? It's not obvious (to me).
>
I guess that nsecps stands for "nanoseconds per second", although the
code appears to be storing that value left shifted by
* John Stultz wrote:
> Due to how the MONOTONIC_RAW accumulation logic was handled,
> there is the potential for a 1ns discontinuity when we do
> accumulations. This small discontinuity has for the most part
> gone un-noticed, but since ARM64 enabled CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
* John Stultz wrote:
> Due to how the MONOTONIC_RAW accumulation logic was handled,
> there is the potential for a 1ns discontinuity when we do
> accumulations. This small discontinuity has for the most part
> gone un-noticed, but since ARM64 enabled CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
> in their vDSO
Due to how the MONOTONIC_RAW accumulation logic was handled,
there is the potential for a 1ns discontinuity when we do
accumulations. This small discontinuity has for the most part
gone un-noticed, but since ARM64 enabled CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
in their vDSO clock_gettime implementation, we've seen
Due to how the MONOTONIC_RAW accumulation logic was handled,
there is the potential for a 1ns discontinuity when we do
accumulations. This small discontinuity has for the most part
gone un-noticed, but since ARM64 enabled CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
in their vDSO clock_gettime implementation, we've seen
6 matches
Mail list logo