From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263032AbVF3Vqr (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:46:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263040AbVF3Vqr (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:46:47 -0400 Received: from willy.net1.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:6925 "EHLO willy.net1.nerim.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263032AbVF3Vqp (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:46:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:46:42 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Olivier Croquette Cc: LKML Subject: Re: setitimer expire too early (Kernel 2.4) Message-ID: <20050630214642.GK8907@alpha.home.local> References: <42C444AA.2070508@free.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42C444AA.2070508@free.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello Olivier, On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 09:14:50PM +0200, Olivier Croquette wrote: > > I am refering to this bug: > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4569 > > A thread led to a patch from Paulo: > > http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/1/message/59454/flat > > This patch has been included in the kernel 2.6.12. > > 1. How can I easily check if the patch is planned for include in the 2.4? Right now, simply by asking Marcelo. As he's moving his tree from BK to git, I suspect we'll not see any intermediate merge before 2.4.32-pre1. > 2. I downloaded the full 2.4.31 source code. The patch appears not to be > included. Where/Who should I signal that? Here is a good place. Unfortunately, the thread pointed above ended quickly, and it does not seem clear from this whether Paulo's patch should be applied or not, as adding 1 jiffie at 100 Hz will result in a (noticeable) 10 ms additionnal sleep time. If you know of applications which break because of this problem, and there is a general consensus stating that the patch will not break anything, I can issue a 2.4.31-hf1, but it does not seem critical enough to justify a hotfix. Regards, Willy