From: Andreas Bombe <aeb@debian.org>
To: John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] Xorg doesn't like 4e8b14526 "time: Improve sanity checking of timekeeping inputs"
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 04:02:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120901020252.GA6402@amos.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5040F7CE.6030505@us.ibm.com>
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 10:43:42AM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> On 08/30/2012 09:05 PM, Andreas Bombe wrote:
> >With that somewhat easy test I bisected it down to 4e8b14526 "time:
> >Improve sanity checking of timekeeping inputs". The latest Linus git
> >(155e36d40) with a revert of the bisected commit does not show the
> >problem.
>
> Thanks so much for bisecting this down!
> I'm guessing X is passing crazy large timespecs into select (via
> WaitForSomething()) values that are catching on the ktime_t overflow
> check in timespec_valid(). Previously these would be clamped to
> KTIME_MAX (which basically is infinity) in the timer subsystem
> before.
>
> So the issue is the patch in question is too strict in its
> validation. We want to be strict on things like timekeeping inputs,
> but for timers wait to infinity is still valid.
>
> The attached (sorry not inline, on the road) patch should fix this,
> but could you verify it? (I'm running my testing concurrently)
I'm running it now and it's looking good. I did the video test again and
confirmed with strace that X was doing the giant timeout in select
again, but this time without any errors.
--
Andreas Bombe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-01 2:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-31 4:05 [REGRESSION] Xorg doesn't like 4e8b14526 "time: Improve sanity checking of timekeeping inputs" Andreas Bombe
2012-08-31 4:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-31 17:41 ` Andreas Bombe
2012-08-31 17:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-31 17:43 ` John Stultz
2012-09-01 2:02 ` Andreas Bombe [this message]
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=20120901020252.GA6402@amos.fritz.box \
--to=aeb@debian.org \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.