Re: [patch] jiffies wraparound [Re: 2.1.125 Show stopper list: Draft]
Richard Gooch (rgooch@atnf.csiro.au)
Fri, 23 Oct 1998 15:58:33 +1000
Linus Torvalds writes:
>
>
> On Fri, 23 Oct 1998, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> >
> > > HZ is already there. It's defined to be 100. You get it from
> > > the header files. End of story.
> >
> > So we are stuck with 100 until the end of time? That just sucks.
>
> Albert. Take a deep breath, and then USE YOUR BRAIN for a second.
>
> It really helps. And I've been continually disgusted by how _little_
> people use their brain, especially when it comes to glibc issues.
>
> There is ABSOLUTELY no point in having a variable HZ interface to user
> mode. None. Nada. Zilch.
>
> Especially as the only thing that knows about HZ is "clock_t", and if I
> remember correctly the _only_ system call that actually returns a clock_t
> is "clock()".
What system call is this? The i386 unistd.h makes no mention of it.
> In short: HZ is not variable. Neither is the coprocessor reset value.
>
> What you are suggesting is akin to making a sysconfig entry for the value
> of PI. You can do it, but there is no point.
Except when some backwater state legislates to make PI equal to 3 :-)
Regards,
Richard....
-
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/