Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> * Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote:
>
>   
>>> ah! It passes in a low-res time source into a high-res time interface 
>>> (pthread_cond_timedwait()). Could you change the time(NULL) + 1 to 
>>> time(NULL) + 2, or change it to:
>>>
>>> 	gettimeofday(&wait, NULL);
>>> 	wait.tv_sec++;
>>>       
>> OK, I'm with you, hi-res timer.
>> But even so, how is the time in the past after adding a second.
>>
>> Is it because I'm not setting tv_nsec when it's close to a second 
>> boundary, and hence your recommendation above?
>>     
>
> yeah, it looks a bit suspicious: you create a +1 second timeout out of a 
> 1 second resolution timesource. I dont yet understand the failure mode 
> though that results in that looping and in the 30% CPU time use - do you 
> understand it perhaps? (and automount is still functional while this is 
> happening, correct?)
>   

Can't say, I have automount running because I get it by default, but I 
have nothing using at on my test machine. Why is it looping so fast when 
there are no mount points defined? If the config changes there's no 
requirement to notice right away, is there?

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO TMR Associates, Inc
  Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/