On 06/27, Chris Snook wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >On 06/26, Chris Snook wrote:
> >>Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >>>on top of sys_time-speedup.patch
> >>>
> >>>Ingo Molnar wrote:
> asmlinkage long sys_time(time_t __user * tloc)
> {
> - time_t i;
> - struct timeval tv;
> + /*
> >
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 06/26, Chris Snook wrote:
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
on top of sys_time-speedup.patch
Ingo Molnar wrote:
asmlinkage long sys_time(time_t __user * tloc)
{
- time_t i;
- struct timeval tv;
+ /*
+* We read xtime.tv_sec atomically - it's updated
+
On 06/26, Chris Snook wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >on top of sys_time-speedup.patch
> >
> >Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> asmlinkage long sys_time(time_t __user * tloc)
> >> {
> >>- time_t i;
> >>- struct timeval tv;
> >>+ /*
> >>+* We read xtime.tv_sec atomically - it's updated
> >>+*
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
on top of sys_time-speedup.patch
Ingo Molnar wrote:
asmlinkage long sys_time(time_t __user * tloc)
{
- time_t i;
- struct timeval tv;
+ /*
+* We read xtime.tv_sec atomically - it's updated
+* atomically by update_wall_time(), so no need t
on top of sys_time-speedup.patch
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> asmlinkage long sys_time(time_t __user * tloc)
> {
> - time_t i;
> - struct timeval tv;
> + /*
> + * We read xtime.tv_sec atomically - it's updated
> + * atomically by update_wall_time(), so no need to
> + * even
5 matches
Mail list logo