In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Polstra writes: >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >Poul-Henning Kamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Polstra writes: >> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >> >John Polstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> >Another interesting thing is that the jumps are always 7.7x seconds >> >back -- usually 7.79 seconds. This is even true with more data points >> >from two different machines. >> >> Yes, I noticed, but didn't dare draw conclusions based on two data points. > >It's pretty consistent -- always 7.7somthing. > >> This points to an arithmetic overflow (ie: point 3 in my previous email) > >Yes, I think you're onto something now. It's a 550 MHz. machine, so >the TSC increments every 1.82 nsec. And 1.82 nsec * 2^32 is 7.81 >seconds. :-)
In that case I'm almost willing to put an AnchorSteam on microuptime() being interrupted for more than good is in which case the splhigh() should cure it. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
