Please inline the patches There are 1000000 microseconds / second, the default interval is 1000us, but let's say we did it more frequently at 100us 1000000 us / 100 intervals = 10000 samples / second * 60 sec/min * 60 min/hr * 24 hrs/day * 365 days / year * 1000 (very pessimistic diff) = an accumulated diff of 3.1536×10^14 With a max double of 9x10^15/3.15*10^14 we could run for 30 years before we move into normal numbers. So, the problem with your patch, is not just the problem which it proposes to fix, is one I see as mostly theoretical, but there is the potential for accumulating small inaccuracies. Of course, there is always the chance that I made some kind of error in my analysis here, please feel free to point it out! What might be more interesting is how long would it take for the cycles to overflow? Thanks John On Mon, 14 Nov 2016, Piotr Gregor wrote: > There was an error in previous patch. Please find attached corrected patch. > > cheers, > Piotr >
