public inbox for linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ia64 clocksource
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:50:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1184712606.5836.24.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070714002509.GJ2317@localhost>

On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 18:31 -0400, Bob Picco wrote:
> Hi:
> Thanks for the review.
> Hidetoshi Seto wrote:	[Tue Jul 17 2007, 06:55:47AM EDT]
> > Bob Picco wrote:
> > >@@ -214,61 +209,56 @@ ENTRY(fsys_gettimeofday)
> >  :
> > > 	movl r27 = xtime
> >  :
> > > .time_redo:
> > >-	.pred.rel.mutex p8,p9,p10
> > >-	ld4.acq r28 = [r29]	// xtime_lock.sequence. Must come first for 
> > >locking purposes
> > >+	ld4.acq r28 = [r20]	// gtod_lock.sequence, Must be first in 
> > >struct
> >  :
> > > 	ld8 r8 = [r27],-IA64_TIMESPEC_TV_NSEC_OFFSET	// xtime.tv_nsec
> >  :
> > >-	ld4 r10 = [r29]		// xtime_lock.sequence
> > >+	ld4 r10 = [r20]		// gtod_lock.sequence, old 
> > >xtime_lock.sequence
> >  :
> > > 	cmp4.ne.or p7,p0 = r28,r10
> > >-(p7)	br.cond.dpnt.few .time_redo	// sequence number changed ?
> > >+(p7)	br.cond.dpnt.few .time_redo	// sequence number changed, outer 
> > >loop2
> > 
> > This patch removes locking xtime_lock but the code still reads xtime
> Well what I see is the update_vsyscall holding the xtime_lock and then
> acquiring the fsyscall_gtod_data.lock seqlock. This sequence begins in
> do_settimeofday. So the vsyscall could have a tiny window of discrepancy
> but miminal. Perhaps John can comment on this.  To me this is no
> different than x86_64 but perhaps I'm missing a subtle difference.
> > 
> > Since gtod_lock.sequence will not tell us whether xtime is updated
> > (or going to be updated) while in this window, the result may be wrong...


So w/ x86_64, we've split the xtime_lock and get vgtod_lock, so that
only when the vsyscall page is being updated do we hold a write on the
vgtod_lock. This is safe as the vsyscall gtod does not access the
kernel's time structures (xtime and friends). Instead it reads its copy
of them that is made in update_vsyscall().

So it should be fine to use the gtod_lock.sequence, assuming you're also
not touching the kernel's xtime directly  (and instead using copy of
xtime made in update_vsyscall).

Does that make sense?
-john




  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-07-17 22:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-07-14  0:25 [PATCH 1/2] ia64 clocksource Bob Picco
2007-07-14 10:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-07-16 10:07 ` Bob Picco
2007-07-16 21:33 ` Luck, Tony
2007-07-17 10:55 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2007-07-17 22:31 ` Bob Picco
2007-07-17 22:50 ` john stultz [this message]
2007-07-18  9:27 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2007-07-19 16:31 ` Doug Chapman

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=1184712606.5836.24.camel@localhost \
    --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