[Cbe-oss-dev] [PATCH 4:6] spufs: fix spu time slice count

Christoph Hellwig hch at lst.de
Tue May 13 19:58:28 EST 2008


On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:54:23AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> But in the case where you don't add 1 to that now simply means we'll
> get an unsigned overflow instead when the next scheduler tick happens,
> I don't think that's a good idea either.

s/overflow/underflow/ of course..




More information about the cbe-oss-dev mailing list