From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: possible time_interpolator bug?
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2004 06:42:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1077086574.985.56.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> (raw)
All,
Using my ia64-cyclone patch I've been occasionally noticing time
inconsistencies near second overflows. Being as the whole purpose of the
patch is to avoid time inconsistencies, I've been wearing my forehead
raw trying to find the bug in my implementation of the cyclone time
interpolator.
I believe I have found either a bug in the time_interpolator code, or a
bug in my understanding of how it is supposed to work.
Looking in kernel/timer.c at update_wall_time_one_tick() and
update_wall_time().
First in update_wall_time():
static void update_wall_time(unsigned long ticks)
{
do {
ticks--;
update_wall_time_one_tick();
} while (ticks);
if (xtime.tv_nsec >= 1000000000) {
xtime.tv_nsec -= 1000000000;
xtime.tv_sec++;
time_interpolator_update(NSEC_PER_SEC);
second_overflow();
}
}
So each second, we call "_update(NSEC_PER_SEC)", however for each tick
we call update_wall_time_one_tick() which calls "_update(delta_nsec)".
Thus in a period of one second, we call _update() HZ times w/
~NSEC_PER_SEC/HZ as an argument, then at the second overflow we call it
again w/ NSEC_PER_SEC.
It seems that calling _update() on the second overflow is unnecessary.
And because in my implementation of update_cyclone(), we then clear the
offset_base variable, this causes time inconsistencies.
It would be noted that time inconsistencies are not seen using the ITC
interpolator, however the ITC interpolator has an empty _update
function.
Am I just missing something here?
thanks
-john
next prev reply other threads:[~2004-02-18 6:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-12 3:22 [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.3-rc2_ia64-cyclone_A0 john stultz
2004-02-13 0:14 ` David Mosberger
2004-02-13 1:05 ` john stultz
2004-02-13 1:16 ` David Mosberger
2004-02-13 1:41 ` Chris McDermott
2004-02-13 2:07 ` David Mosberger
2004-02-13 2:29 ` john stultz
2004-02-13 7:09 ` David Mosberger
2004-02-13 18:55 ` Mallick, Asit K
2004-02-17 2:46 ` john stultz
2004-02-17 21:41 ` David Mosberger
2004-02-18 5:20 ` [RFC][PATCH] linux-2.6.3-rc2_ia64-cyclone_A1 john stultz
2004-02-18 6:42 ` john stultz [this message]
2004-02-18 6:58 ` possible time_interpolator bug? David Mosberger
2004-02-23 19:44 ` [PATCH] linux-2.6.3_time-interpolator-fix_A0 john stultz
2004-02-23 19:55 ` David Mosberger
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=1077086574.985.56.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com \
--to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox