public inbox for linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ian Wienand <ianw@gelato.unsw.edu.au>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] now < last_tick problem
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 00:52:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-106574725701696@msgid-missing> (raw)

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1189 bytes --]

Hi,
                                                                                                                                                    
I started hitting this problem when using httperf, upon investigation
it seems to be easily triggered when you make gettimeofday() calls in
very close succession (just doing them in a tight loop easily
replicates the problem).
                                                                                                                                                    
I think the problem is that in itc_get_offset() there is a race
between getting the now value and calculating the last_tick from
itm_next; if we are interrupted between the two itm_next will be set
after now.
                                                                                                                                                    
Suggested patch attached; note the fsyscall implementation does not
appear to have this problem.
                                                                                                                                                    
-i
ianw@gelato.unsw.edu.au
http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au

[-- Attachment #2: time.c.diff --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 726 bytes --]

===== arch/ia64/kernel/time.c 1.35 vs edited =====
--- 1.35/arch/ia64/kernel/time.c	Wed Oct  8 12:53:38 2003
+++ edited/arch/ia64/kernel/time.c	Fri Oct 10 09:49:37 2003
@@ -72,10 +72,16 @@
 itc_get_offset (void)
 {
 	unsigned long elapsed_cycles, lost = jiffies - wall_jiffies;
-	unsigned long now = ia64_get_itc(), last_tick;
+	unsigned long now, last_tick;
 
 	last_tick = (cpu_data(TIME_KEEPER_ID)->itm_next
 		     - (lost + 1)*cpu_data(TIME_KEEPER_ID)->itm_delta);
+	
+	/*
+	 * get now after last_tick to avoid race condition where
+	 * itm_next might be updated.
+	 */
+	now = ia64_get_itc();
 
 	if (unlikely((long) (now - last_tick) < 0)) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR "CPU %d: now < last_tick (now=0x%lx,last_tick=0x%lx)!\n",

                 reply	other threads:[~2003-10-10  0:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=marc-linux-ia64-106574725701696@msgid-missing \
    --to=ianw@gelato.unsw.edu.au \
    --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