Re: [PATCH] correct inconsistent ntp interval/tick_length usage

[Roman Zippel]

Hi,

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, john stultz wrote:

> +/* Because using NSEC_PER_SEC would be too easy */
> +#define NTP_INTERVAL_LENGTH ((((s64)TICK_USEC*NSEC_PER_USEC*USER_HZ)+CLOCK_TICK_ADJUST)/NTP_INTERVAL_FREQ)

Why are you using USER_HZ? Did you test this with HZ!=100?
Anyway, please don't make more complicated than it already is.
What I said previously about the update interval is still valid, so the 
correct solution is to use the simpler NTP_INTERVAL_LENGTH calculation 
from my last mail and to omit the correction for NO_HZ.

bye, Roman
--
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/