Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.18-rt7: fix more issues with 32-bit cycles_t in latency_trace.c (take 3)

From: Sergei Shtylyov <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 15:29:15 +0300

Hello.

Ingo Molnar wrote:

>>   What was the destiny of that patch? I haven't seen it accepted, 
>>haven't seen any comments... while this is not a mere warning fix. 
>>What am I expected to do to get it accepted -- recast it against 
>>2.6.19-rt1?

> i'd suggest to redo it - but please keep it simple and clean. Those 
> dozens of casts to u64 are quite ugly.

    Alas, there's *nothing* I can do about it with 32-bit cycles_t. And if you 
look at the kernel, this is not the only case of such "ugliness", look at this 
commit for example:

http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/paulus/powerpc.git;a=commit;h=685143ac1f7a579a3fac9c7f2ac8f82e95af6864

> Why is cycles_t 32-bits on some 
> of the arches to begin with?

    I guess this was done for speed reasons. That's not a qustion for me 
although...

> 	Ingo

WBR, Sergei