From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: "Bill Rugolsky Jr." <brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com>
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][4/4] poll()/select() timeout behavior
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:13:28 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040220201328.609fe4e2.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040220210452.GE1912@ti19.telemetry-investments.com>
"Bill Rugolsky Jr." <brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com> wrote:
>
> This patch forces select() to wait *at least* the specified timeout if
> no events have occurred, same as poll(). The SUSv3 man page for select(2)
> says:
>
> "If the timeout parameter is not a null pointer, it specifies a maximum
> interval to wait for the selection to complete. If the specified
> time interval expires without any requested operation becoming ready,
> the function shall return."
>
> Additionally:
>
> "If the requested timeout interval requires a finer granularity than
> the implementation supports, the actual timeout interval shall be
> rounded up to the next supported value."
>
> Unfortunately, fixing the fencepost error places a hard lower limit of
> 1/HZ on the time slept, and increases the average minimum sleep time
> threefold, from 1/(2*HZ) jiffy to 3/(2*HZ).
I'm inclined to live with the current behaviour rather than
risk breaking existing apps.
>
> --- linux/fs/select.c 2004-02-20 14:29:11.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux/fs/select.c 2004-02-20 14:30:18.326814232 -0500
> @@ -313,8 +313,8 @@
> if (sec < 0 || usec < 0 || usec >= 1000000)
> goto out_nofds;
>
> - if ((unsigned long) sec < (MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT-1) / HZ - 1) {
> - timeout = ROUND_UP(usec, 1000000/HZ);
> + if ((unsigned long) sec < (MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT-2) / HZ - 1) {
> + timeout = ROUND_UP(usec, 1000000/HZ) + 1;
> timeout += sec * (unsigned long) HZ;
> } else {
> timeout = MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT-1;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-21 4:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-20 21:04 [PATCH][4/4] poll()/select() timeout behavior Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2004-02-21 4:13 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2004-02-21 16:18 ` Jamie Lokier
2004-02-21 19:27 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040220201328.609fe4e2.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=brugolsky@telemetry-investments.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.