Re: gettimeofday() jumping into the future

[James Courtier-Dutton]

James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
> James Courtier-Dutton wrote:
> > than half of the max value cycle_now can have, one can take a very
> > simple approach.
> > Treat the cycle_now, cycle_last value as signed.
> > If they have same sign, do the comparison as unsigned.
> > If they have different signs, do the comparision as signed.
> >
> > James
> Sorry,
> >Treat the cycle_now, cycle_last value as signed.
> >If they have same sign, do the comparison as unsigned.
> >If they have different signs, do the comparision as signed.
> is wrong.
It should be:
treat cycle_now and cycle_last as unsigned.
unsigned tmp;
tmp = cycle_now - cycle_last;
if (tmp > max_difference_threshold) cycle_now = cycle_last;

This correctly handles cycle_now going backwards as well as wrap around.
The only way to catch all edge cases is to be able to make an assumption
on the maximum acceptable difference between cycle_now and cycle_last,
where difference is the shortest distance between values if they were
pointers into a ring buffer. The other assumption made here is that the 
wrap around only happens at max_uint of cycle_now.


--
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/