Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-42,: Re: jiffies wraparound

# Re: jiffies wraparound

Chris Evans (chris@ferret.lmh.ox.ac.uk)
Sun, 18 Oct 1998 19:12:08 +0100 (GMT)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Michael Elizabeth Chastain: "Re: [PATCH] CONFIG_SMP available for 2.1.125"
- Previous message: Eastep, Tom: "Re: [PATCH] CONFIG_SMP available for 2.1.125"
- In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: jiffies wraparound"
- Next in thread: Rogier Wolff: "Re: jiffies wraparound"

On Sun, 18 Oct 1998, Alan Cox wrote:

> > by zero, the 2.1.126 time code survived this quick 'time travel' without
> > problems. Apart from processes getting killed during wraparound, there is
> > no big problem, is there?
>
> Im losing the entire tty subsystem for good when this occurs
>
> Shrug, Linus hath spoken. Onwards 2.2

For me, a stable kernel should have all known bugs fixed. This includes
ones that "won't happen often", and especially ones that will "certainly
occur after a given time", even if that time is large.

Not fixing this for 2.2 is even worse considering I'm seeing at least 3
seasoned kernel hackers tracking down and fixing all the jiffie misuse.
It's a shame to discard their efforts until 2.3.

Hopefully this is a "Linus hath spoken" of the reversible kind :-)

Chris

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Michael Elizabeth Chastain: "Re: [PATCH] CONFIG_SMP available for 2.1.125"
- Previous message: Eastep, Tom: "Re: [PATCH] CONFIG_SMP available for 2.1.125"
- In reply to: Alan Cox: "Re: jiffies wraparound"
- Next in thread: Rogier Wolff: "Re: jiffies wraparound"