From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [patch 5/8] hrtimer remove state field
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 10:01:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1142499713.29968.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0603152055380.16802@scrub.home>
Roman,
> I have an idea what might have happened. You don't advance the pending
> state, if the signal isn't queued, so that the pending state is screwed up
> afterwards. Although I don't see how it could crash the kernel (it has
> only the potential to mess up the timer queue via hrtimer_forward() a
> bit), but I don't know what other patches were applied.
Good catch, but I dont see how it would trigger the bug.
> For example no current user restarts an active timer, which could be used
> to simplify the locking.
How does this simplify the locking ? It just removes the
hrtimer_cancel() call in hrtimer_start() and makes the
switch_hrtimer_base() code a bit simpler.
The general locking rules would be still the same and I dont see
increased flexibility at all.
> If we tightened a bit what a user is allowed to
> do, we could gain flexibility on the other side, e.g. allow drivers to
> create timer sources or how to integrate cpu timer.
-ENOPARSE. Can you please explain what "allow drivers to create timer
sources" means and why the above locking is in the way ?
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-16 9:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-12 10:37 [patch 0/8] hrtimer updates Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 10:37 ` [patch 1/8] hrtimer optimize softirq runqueues Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 10:37 ` [patch 2/8] Pass current time to hrtimer_forward() Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 10:37 ` [patch 3/8] posix-timer cleanup common_timer_get() Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 10:37 ` [patch 4/8] hrtimer simplify nanosleep Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 10:37 ` [patch 5/8] hrtimer remove state field Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 12:13 ` Roman Zippel
2006-03-12 13:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 13:26 ` Roman Zippel
2006-03-12 13:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 13:55 ` Roman Zippel
2006-03-12 14:15 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 14:30 ` Roman Zippel
2006-03-12 14:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 15:17 ` Roman Zippel
2006-03-12 15:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 16:00 ` Roman Zippel
2006-03-12 16:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 16:57 ` [patch] hrtimer remove replace state check by BUG_ON Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-16 1:05 ` [patch 5/8] hrtimer remove state field Roman Zippel
2006-03-16 9:01 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2006-03-17 22:07 ` Roman Zippel
2006-03-18 8:46 ` Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 10:37 ` [patch 6/8] Remove it_real_value calculation from proc/*/stat Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 10:37 ` [patch 7/8] Remove DEFINE_KTIME and ktime_to_clock_t() Thomas Gleixner
2006-03-12 10:37 ` [patch 8/8] Remove nsec_t typedef Thomas Gleixner
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=1142499713.29968.11.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.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