Re: [PATCH 1/1] timers: internal_add_timer() should update ->next_timer if ->active_timers == 0

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 06:31:37PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> internal_add_timer(timer) updates base->next_timer only if
> timer->expires < base->next_timer. This is correct, but it also
> makes sense to do the same if we add the first non-deferrable
> timer.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>

I have pulled this on in, thank you Oleg!

							Thanx, Paul

> ---
>  kernel/timer.c |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c
> index 6582b82..9492d57 100644
> --- a/kernel/timer.c
> +++ b/kernel/timer.c
> @@ -388,9 +388,9 @@ static void internal_add_timer(struct tvec_base *base, struct timer_list *timer)
>  	 * Update base->active_timers and base->next_timer
>  	 */
>  	if (!tbase_get_deferrable(timer->base)) {
> -		if (time_before(timer->expires, base->next_timer))
> +		if (!base->active_timers++ ||
> +		    time_before(timer->expires, base->next_timer))
>  			base->next_timer = timer->expires;
> -		base->active_timers++;
>  	}
>  }
> 
> -- 
> 1.5.5.1
> 
>