WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] cpufreq: weird bug in set_time_scale

To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Xen-devel] cpufreq: weird bug in set_time_scale
From: "Langsdorf, Mark" <mark.langsdorf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:55:36 -0500
Delivery-date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 08:58:24 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcgMHynrWGtjBxvCTSCDYPX32f/mCw==
Thread-topic: cpufreq: weird bug in set_time_scale
On my test machine, in set_time_scale(),
the following code:
        ts->mul_frac = div_frac(MILLISECS(1000), tps32);
crashes with a division by zero error if 
tps32 == 1000000000d.  Unfortunately, tps32 is
often that value.

Does anyone know why this happens?  I've 
resolved it temporarily by checking for
tps32 == 1000000000 and changing the 
value slightly (101000010d works fine
on my test machine), but I'm not sure 
if that's the approved approach for Xen.

-Mark Langsdorf
Operating System Research Center
AMD



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel