Andrew Morton wrote:
George Anzinger wrote:
+ while (time_before_eq(p->signal->real_timer.expires, jiffies))
+ p->signal->real_timer.expires += inc;
It gives me the creeps when I see timer code doing this, and it seems to be
done relatively frequently.
Surely it can be
George Anzinger wrote:
>
> + while (time_before_eq(p->signal->real_timer.expires, jiffies))
> + p->signal->real_timer.expires += inc;
It gives me the creeps when I see timer code doing this, and it seems to be
done relatively frequently.
Surely it can be calculated arithmetically
George Anzinger wrote:
Tom Marshall wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 08:21:25PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
Tom Marshall wrote:
The patch to fix "setitimer timer expires too early" is causing
issues for
the Helix server. We have a timer processs that updates the server's
timestamp on an iti
George Anzinger wrote:
Tom Marshall wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 08:21:25PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
[...]
Unfortunately, this is not so clear cut as it seems :(
Oops! That patch is wrong. The +1 should be applied to the initial
interval _only_. We KNOW when the repeating intervals s
Tom Marshall wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 08:21:25PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
Tom Marshall wrote:
The patch to fix "setitimer timer expires too early" is causing issues for
the Helix server. We have a timer processs that updates the server's
timestamp on an itimer and it expects the sig
5 matches
Mail list logo
