On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 15:21:00 -0600
Rob Landley wrote:
> On 01/01/14 06:41, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 22:17:39 -0600
> > Rob Landley wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/30/13 09:26, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
> >>> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 15:21:00 -0600
Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote:
On 01/01/14 06:41, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 22:17:39 -0600
Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote:
On 12/30/13 09:26, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
Oleg Nesterov
On 01/01/14 06:41, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 22:17:39 -0600
Rob Landley wrote:
On 12/30/13 09:26, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Not sure I understand... except that timekeeping_resume() does
On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 22:17:39 -0600
Rob Landley wrote:
> On 12/30/13 09:26, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
> > Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >> Not sure I understand... except that timekeeping_resume() does
> >> __timekeeping_inject_sleeptime().
> >
> > Hmm, you are
On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 22:17:39 -0600
Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote:
On 12/30/13 09:26, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
Not sure I understand... except that timekeeping_resume() does
__timekeeping_inject_sleeptime().
On 01/01/14 06:41, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 22:17:39 -0600
Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote:
On 12/30/13 09:26, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
Not sure I understand... except that timekeeping_resume()
On 12/30/13 09:26, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
Not sure I understand... except that timekeeping_resume() does
__timekeeping_inject_sleeptime().
Hmm, you are right. The sleeptime is added to the monotonic boottime.
So the first value of
On 12/30/13 09:26, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
Not sure I understand... except that timekeeping_resume() does
__timekeeping_inject_sleeptime().
Hmm, you are right. The sleeptime is added to the monotonic boottime.
So the
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 12/30, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> <
> > On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 15:45:04 +0100
> > Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > > Add Frederic, I am not sure I understand this correctly.
> > >
> > > On 12/25, Rob Landley wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There are
On 12/30, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
<
> On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 15:45:04 +0100
> Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > Add Frederic, I am not sure I understand this correctly.
> >
> > On 12/25, Rob Landley wrote:
> > >
> > > There are two values here, the first is seconds since boot time (which
> > > is just
On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 15:45:04 +0100
Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Add Frederic, I am not sure I understand this correctly.
>
> On 12/25, Rob Landley wrote:
> >
> > There are two values here, the first is seconds since boot time (which
> > is just elapsed time; at one point it was ajusted for suspend
On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 15:45:04 +0100
Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
Add Frederic, I am not sure I understand this correctly.
On 12/25, Rob Landley wrote:
There are two values here, the first is seconds since boot time (which
is just elapsed time; at one point it was ajusted for
On 12/30, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 15:45:04 +0100
Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
Add Frederic, I am not sure I understand this correctly.
On 12/25, Rob Landley wrote:
There are two values here, the first is seconds since boot time (which
is just
On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 16:11:10 +0100
Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/30, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Fri, 27 Dec 2013 15:45:04 +0100
Oleg Nesterov o...@redhat.com wrote:
Add Frederic, I am not sure I understand this correctly.
On 12/25, Rob Landley wrote:
There
Add Frederic, I am not sure I understand this correctly.
On 12/25, Rob Landley wrote:
>
> There are two values here, the first is seconds since boot time (which
> is just elapsed time; at one point it was ajusted for suspend and that
> was revered as confusing).
Hmm, uptime_proc_show() still
Add Frederic, I am not sure I understand this correctly.
On 12/25, Rob Landley wrote:
There are two values here, the first is seconds since boot time (which
is just elapsed time; at one point it was ajusted for suspend and that
was revered as confusing).
Hmm, uptime_proc_show() still uses
There are two values here, the first is seconds since boot time (which
is just elapsed time; at one point it was ajusted for suspend and that
was revered as confusing).
The second value isn't documented but looking at fs/proc/uptime.c I
think it's idle time? Except, if yo uadd up the idle
There are two values here, the first is seconds since boot time (which
is just elapsed time; at one point it was ajusted for suspend and that
was revered as confusing).
The second value isn't documented but looking at fs/proc/uptime.c I
think it's idle time? Except, if yo uadd up the idle
18 matches
Mail list logo
