Linux-kernel mailing list archive 1998-42,: Re: ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage.

# Re: ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage.

Olivier Galibert (galibert@pobox.com)
Fri, 23 Oct 1998 22:37:15 +0200

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Linus Torvalds: "Re: ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage."
- Previous message: Stephen Williams: "linux/alpha 2.1.102 dies in die_if_kernel"
- In reply to: Perry Harrington: "ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage."
- Next in thread: Miquel van Smoorenburg: "Re: ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage."

On Fri, Oct 23, 1998 at 12:24:22PM -0700, Perry Harrington wrote:
> Time formats:
>
> It seems to me that expressing the time constants in /proc would be
> as simple as:
>
> <seconds>.<microseconds>
>
> If EVER there is a need for processor clock tick, or kernel task switch
> interval information, it can be added as a well thought out interface
> LATER.
>
> Linus has already expressed this as a sane format that is independent of
> the HZ value, etc. The precision of the usec is directly proportional
> to the HZ value. You don't change the format of the data to get more
> precision; hence, it's portable.

You may want to use seconds.nanoseconds instead. It stills fit in a
32bit integer and we already have timers with sub-microsecond accuracy
(the TSC in particular). Also, POSIX's struct timespec already uses
nanoseconds.

OG.

-
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: Linus Torvalds: "Re: ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage."
- Previous message: Stephen Williams: "linux/alpha 2.1.102 dies in die_if_kernel"
- In reply to: Perry Harrington: "ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage."
- Next in thread: Miquel van Smoorenburg: "Re: ARMS WAVING!!! Proposal to fix /proc dainbrammage."