Re: [PATCH 4/4] timekeeping: clocksource_cyc2ns: Document intended range limitation

2016-11-21 Thread John Stultz
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Chris Metcalf wrote: > On 11/21/2016 3:54 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> * John Stultz wrote: >> >>> From: Chris Metcalf >>> >>> The "cycles" argument should not be an absolute clocksource cycle >>> value, as the implementation's arithmetic will overflow relatively

Re: [PATCH 4/4] timekeeping: clocksource_cyc2ns: Document intended range limitation

2016-11-21 Thread Chris Metcalf
On 11/21/2016 3:54 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: * John Stultz wrote: From: Chris Metcalf The "cycles" argument should not be an absolute clocksource cycle value, as the implementation's arithmetic will overflow relatively easily with wide (64 bit) clocksource counters. For performance, the implem

Re: [PATCH 4/4] timekeeping: clocksource_cyc2ns: Document intended range limitation

2016-11-21 Thread Ingo Molnar
* John Stultz wrote: > From: Chris Metcalf > > The "cycles" argument should not be an absolute clocksource cycle > value, as the implementation's arithmetic will overflow relatively > easily with wide (64 bit) clocksource counters. > > For performance, the implementation is simple and fast, s

[PATCH 4/4] timekeeping: clocksource_cyc2ns: Document intended range limitation

2016-11-18 Thread John Stultz
From: Chris Metcalf The "cycles" argument should not be an absolute clocksource cycle value, as the implementation's arithmetic will overflow relatively easily with wide (64 bit) clocksource counters. For performance, the implementation is simple and fast, since the function is intended for only