public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olivier Langlois <olivier@trillion01.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	Geoff Levand <geoff@infradead.org>,
	Gilad Ben Yossef <gilad@benyossef.com>,
	Hakan Akkan <hakanakkan@gmail.com>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>,
	Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] posix_timers: Defer per process timer stop after timers processing
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 00:27:59 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1366950479.7911.22.camel@Wailaba2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFTL4hzTbko=jArO+kFF3icDbXmZzamDr1FJL3Vx+11Q54NABg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 14:47 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> 
> >
> > I might be mistaken but I believe that firing timers are not rescheduled
> > in the current interrupt context. They are going to be rescheduled later
> > from the task context handling the timer generated signal.
> 
> No, when the timer fires, it might generate a signal. But it won't
> execute that signal right away in the same code path. Instead, after
> signal generation, it may reschedule the timer if necessary then look
> at the next firing timer in the list. This is all made from the same
> timer interrupt context from the same call to run_posix_cpu_timers().
> The signal itself is executed asynchronously. Either by interrupting a
> syscall, or from the irq return path.
> 
Frederic, be careful with the interpretation, there are 2 locations from
where posix_cpu_timer_schedule() can be called.

Call to posix_cpu_timer_schedule() from cpu_timer_fire() only happens if
the signal isn't sent because it is ignored by the recipient.

Maybe the condition around the posix_cpu_timer_schedule() block inside
cpu_timer_fire() could even be a good candidate for 'unlikely'
qualifier.

IMO, a more likely scenario, posix_cpu_timer_schedule() will be called
from dequeue_signal() which will be from from a different context than
the interrupt context.

At best, you have an interesting race!

dequeue_signal() is called when delivering a signal, not when it is
generated, right?

If you have a different understanding then please explain when call to
posix_cpu_timer_schedule() from dequeue_signal() will happen.



  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-26  4:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-18 17:23 [RFC GIT PULL] nohz: Posix cpu timers handling on full dynticks Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-18 17:23 ` [PATCH 1/3] nohz: New APIs to re-evaluate the tick on full dynticks CPUs Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-18 17:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] posix_timers: Defer per process timer stop after timers processing Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-19  4:30   ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-19 12:47     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-26  4:27       ` Olivier Langlois [this message]
2013-04-26  6:21         ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-30 12:54         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-30 17:51           ` Olivier Langlois
2013-05-06 23:03             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-18 17:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] posix_timers: Kick full dynticks CPUs when a posix cpu timer is armed Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-19 12:51 ` [RFC GIT PULL] nohz: Posix cpu timers handling on full dynticks Frederic Weisbecker

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=1366950479.7911.22.camel@Wailaba2 \
    --to=olivier@trillion01.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=geoff@infradead.org \
    --cc=gilad@benyossef.com \
    --cc=hakanakkan@gmail.com \
    --cc=khilman@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=paul.gortmaker@windriver.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.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