Re: time_after - what on earth???

[Adrian McMenamin]

On 12/09/2007, Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2007.09.12 00:19:09 +0200, Rene Herman wrote:
> > On 09/12/2007 12:15 AM, Adrian McMenamin wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/09/2007, Rene Herman <rene.herman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On 09/12/2007 12:05 AM, Adrian McMenamin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> OK, why does this line occasionally return true:
>
> What exactly is "occassionally"?  Does it happen more than once per
> boot? If not, and it happens after a certain time after booting, it
> might be wrapping of the jiffie counter (see below).
>
> >>>>
> >>>>       if ((maple_dev->interval > 0) && (jiffies >maple_dev->when))
> >>>>
> >>>> while this one never does (no other changes made):
> >>>>
> >>>> if  ((maple_dev->interval > 0) && (time_after(jiffies,
> >>>> maple_dev->when)))
> >>> Is maple_dev->when an unsigned long?
> >>>
> >> Yes. Does that make a difference?
> >
> > If it had been a signed type, it could've wrapped to something you didn't
> > expect, explaining the difference at least...
> >
> > With an unsigned long, the only diference should be that time_after() deals
> > with jiffie wrapping which I assume is not an actual problem here. I'll
> > retreat into the shades again... ;-(
>
> If "occasionally" is limited to once per boot, it might be jiffie
> wrapping. IIRC jiffies are initialized so that they wrap after about 5
> minutes of uptime to reveal such bugs without forcing you to wait for
> ages just to have the counter wrap for the first time.
>

No, I mean "works properly" - ie occasionally evaluates as true
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/