From: Olivier Langlois <olivier@trillion01.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] process cputimer is moving faster than its corresponding clock
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:16:28 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1367255788.8833.7.camel@Wailaba2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <517E125E.4050003@gmail.com>
On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 02:25 -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> (4/27/13 12:41 AM), Olivier Langlois wrote:
> >
> >
> > Add thread group delta to cpu timer sample when computing a timer expiration.
> >
> > This is mandatory to make sure that the posix cpu timer does not fire too
> > soon relative to the process cpu clock which do include the task group delta.
> >
> > test case to validate the patch is glibc-2.17/rt/tst-cputimer1.c
>
> First, I could reproduce this issue. thanks. Second, actually, this issue is not
> cause by race. This just occur by timer initialization mistake. I'll show you
> the smallest fix.
>
>
Great!
>
> > @@ -697,7 +755,8 @@ static int posix_cpu_timer_set(struct k_itimer *timer, int flags,
> > if (CPUCLOCK_PERTHREAD(timer->it_clock)) {
> > cpu_clock_sample(timer->it_clock, p, &val);
> > } else {
> > - cpu_timer_sample_group(timer->it_clock, p, &val);
> > + cpu_timer_sample_group(timer->it_clock, p, &val,
> > + CPUTIMER_NEED_DELTA);
>
> POSIX says,
>
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7908799/xsh/timer_gettime.html
> > If the argument ovalue is not NULL, the function timer_settime() stores,
> > in the location referenced by ovalue, a value representing the previous
> > amount of time before the timer would have expired or zero if the timer
> > was disarmed, together with the previous timer reload value. The members
> > of ovalue are subject to the resolution of the timer, and they are the
> > same values that would be returned by a timer_gettime() call at that point in time.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
> but your posix_cpu_timer_set() and posix_cpu_timer_get() are not consistent. I'm worry
> about this.
>
>
> > }
> >
> > if (old) {
> > @@ -845,7 +904,8 @@ static void posix_cpu_timer_get(struct k_itimer *timer, struct itimerspec *itp)
> > read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> > goto dead;
> > } else {
> > - cpu_timer_sample_group(timer->it_clock, p, &now);
> > + cpu_timer_sample_group(timer->it_clock, p, &now,
> > + CPUTIMER_NO_DELTA);
> >
> > clear_dead = (unlikely(p->exit_state) &&
> > thread_group_empty(p));
> > }
>
> --
I have tried to minimize rq locks contention to strict minimum. If to
remain POSIX compliant, it is required to also use CPUTIMER_NEED_DELTA,
so be it. I have no objections.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-29 17:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-05 17:59 [PATCH] process cputimer is moving faster than its corresponding clock Olivier Langlois
2013-04-10 11:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-04-10 15:48 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-12 9:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-04-15 1:55 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-12 9:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-04-12 10:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-04-12 15:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-04-15 6:11 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-19 13:03 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-19 17:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-19 18:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-26 4:40 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-26 6:27 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-26 19:08 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-27 1:51 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-27 2:15 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-27 5:02 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-27 5:17 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-27 5:31 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-27 5:06 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-27 4:40 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] " Olivier Langlois
2013-04-29 0:45 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2013-04-29 17:29 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-29 5:06 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 17:10 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-29 17:41 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-29 17:56 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 18:20 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-29 18:31 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 18:54 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-29 19:09 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 21:20 ` Olivier Langlois
2013-04-29 22:42 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
[not found] ` <1367036552.7911.63.camel@Wailaba2>
2013-04-27 4:40 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] " Olivier Langlois
2013-04-27 4:41 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] " Olivier Langlois
2013-04-29 6:25 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 17:16 ` Olivier Langlois [this message]
2013-04-11 3:29 ` [PATCH] " Olivier Langlois
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=1367255788.8833.7.camel@Wailaba2 \
--to=olivier@trillion01.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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