From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Tim Mann <mann@vmware.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [-mm PATCH] time: fix time going backward w/ clock=pit
Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 17:09:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1148602195.7813.18.camel@leatherman> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060518011116.68055275.akpm@osdl.org>
On Thu, 2006-05-18 at 01:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Tim Mann <mann@vmware.com> wrote:
> >
> > Currently, if you boot with clock=pit on the kernel command line and
> > run a program that loops calling gettimeofday, on many machines you'll
> > observe that time frequently goes backward by about one jiffy. This
> > patch fixes that symptom and also some other related bugs.
>
> And for 2.6.18 we're hoping to get John's x86 timer rework merged up.
> John, do those patches address this bug?
>
> So if we decide these two patches are not-for-2.6.17 then I'll sit on them
> until we decide whether or not to merge John's patches. If we do, and if
> those patches fix this problem then your two patches aren't needed. If
> John's patches don't get merged then I'll need to merge these two.
Hey Andrew,
Sorry I've been so slow here, just starting to recover from a one week
+ flu. :P Here is the PIT fix against the TOD patches that Tim pointed
out. Many thanks to Tim for hunting this down.
thanks
-john
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Index: devmm/arch/i386/kernel/i8253.c
===================================================================
--- devmm.orig/arch/i386/kernel/i8253.c 2006-05-25 18:12:41.000000000 -0500
+++ devmm/arch/i386/kernel/i8253.c 2006-05-25 18:52:31.000000000 -0500
@@ -41,9 +41,25 @@
{
unsigned long flags;
int count;
- u64 jifs;
+ u32 jifs;
+ static int old_count;
+ static u32 old_jifs;
spin_lock_irqsave(&i8253_lock, flags);
+ /*
+ * Although our caller may have the read side of xtime_lock,
+ * this is now a seqlock, and we are cheating in this routine
+ * by having side effects on state that we cannot undo if
+ * there is a collision on the seqlock and our caller has to
+ * retry. (Namely, old_jifs and old_count.) So we must treat
+ * jiffies as volatile despite the lock. We read jiffies
+ * before latching the timer count to guarantee that although
+ * the jiffies value might be older than the count (that is,
+ * the counter may underflow between the last point where
+ * jiffies was incremented and the point where we latch the
+ * count), it cannot be newer.
+ */
+ jifs = jiffies;
outb_p(0x00, PIT_MODE); /* latch the count ASAP */
count = inb_p(PIT_CH0); /* read the latched count */
count |= inb_p(PIT_CH0) << 8;
@@ -55,12 +71,29 @@
outb(LATCH >> 8, PIT_CH0);
count = LATCH - 1;
}
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i8253_lock, flags);
- jifs = jiffies_64;
+ /*
+ * It's possible for count to appear to go the wrong way for a
+ * couple of reasons:
+ *
+ * 1. The timer counter underflows, but we haven't handled the
+ * resulting interrupt and incremented jiffies yet.
+ * 2. Hardware problem with the timer, not giving us continuous time,
+ * the counter does small "jumps" upwards on some Pentium systems,
+ * (see c't 95/10 page 335 for Neptun bug.)
+ *
+ * Previous attempts to handle these cases intelligently were
+ * buggy, so we just do the simple thing now.
+ */
+ if (count > old_count && jifs == old_jifs) {
+ count = old_count;
+ }
+ old_count = count;
+ old_jifs = jifs;
+
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i8253_lock, flags);
- jifs -= INITIAL_JIFFIES;
- count = (LATCH-1) - count;
+ count = (LATCH - 1) - count;
return (cycle_t)(jifs * LATCH) + count;
}
@@ -69,7 +102,7 @@
.name = "pit",
.rating = 110,
.read = pit_read,
- .mask = CLOCKSOURCE_MASK(64),
+ .mask = CLOCKSOURCE_MASK(32),
.mult = 0,
.shift = 20,
};
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-26 0:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-17 23:04 Fix time going backward with clock=pit [1/2] Tim Mann
2006-05-17 23:06 ` Fix time going backward with clock=pit [2/2] Tim Mann
2006-05-18 8:11 ` Fix time going backward with clock=pit [1/2] Andrew Morton
2006-05-19 1:54 ` Tim Mann
2006-05-26 0:09 ` john stultz [this message]
2006-05-18 11:51 ` Roman Zippel
2006-05-18 18:50 ` Tim Mann
2006-05-19 0:09 ` Roman Zippel
2006-05-19 2:02 ` Tim Mann
2006-05-19 15:31 ` Roman Zippel
2006-05-19 23:13 ` Tim Mann
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=1148602195.7813.18.camel@leatherman \
--to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mann@vmware.com \
/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