From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] timers: Use only bucket expiry for base->next_expiry value
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 23:44:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200710214458.GA31351@lenoir> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200710154622.14989-1-anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Hi Anna-Maria,
Nice change, it indeed makes more sense that way.
Just a few details below:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 05:46:22PM +0200, Anna-Maria Behnsen wrote:
> The bucket expiry time is the effective expriy time of timers and is
> greater than or equal to the requested timer expiry time. This is due
> to the guarantee that timers never expire early and the reduced expiry
> granularity in the secondary wheel levels.
>
> When a timer is enqueued, trigger_dyntick_cpu() checks whether the
> timer is the new first timer. This check compares next_expiry with
> the requested timer expiry value and not with the effective expiry
> value of the bucket into which the timer was queued.
>
> Storing the requested timer expiry value in base->next_expiry can lead
> to base->clk going backwards if the requested timer expiry value is
> smaller than base->clk. Commit 30c66fc30ee7 ("timer: Prevent base->clk
> from moving backward") worked around this by preventing the store when
> timer->expiry is before base->clk, but did not fix the underlying
> problem.
>
> Use the expiry value of the bucket into which the timer is queued to
> do the new first timer check. This fixes the base->clk going backward
> problem and also prevents unnecessary softirq invocations when the
> timer->expiry is not equal to the bucket expiry time in case of a new
> first timer which is queued in a secondary wheel level.
I think there shouldn't be such unecessary softirq invocations. Either they
fire at the bucket expiry time or the timer expiry time, it doesn't make
much difference.
More important below:
> -static int calc_wheel_index(unsigned long expires, unsigned long clk)
> +static int calc_wheel_index(unsigned long expires, unsigned long clk,
> + unsigned long *bucket_expiry)
> {
> unsigned long delta = expires - clk;
> unsigned int idx;
>
> if (delta < LVL_START(1)) {
> - idx = calc_index(expires, 0);
> + idx = calc_index(expires, 0, bucket_expiry);
> } else if (delta < LVL_START(2)) {
> - idx = calc_index(expires, 1);
> + idx = calc_index(expires, 1, bucket_expiry);
> } else if (delta < LVL_START(3)) {
> - idx = calc_index(expires, 2);
> + idx = calc_index(expires, 2, bucket_expiry);
> } else if (delta < LVL_START(4)) {
> - idx = calc_index(expires, 3);
> + idx = calc_index(expires, 3, bucket_expiry);
> } else if (delta < LVL_START(5)) {
> - idx = calc_index(expires, 4);
> + idx = calc_index(expires, 4, bucket_expiry);
> } else if (delta < LVL_START(6)) {
> - idx = calc_index(expires, 5);
> + idx = calc_index(expires, 5, bucket_expiry);
> } else if (delta < LVL_START(7)) {
> - idx = calc_index(expires, 6);
> + idx = calc_index(expires, 6, bucket_expiry);
> } else if (LVL_DEPTH > 8 && delta < LVL_START(8)) {
> - idx = calc_index(expires, 7);
> + idx = calc_index(expires, 7, bucket_expiry);
> } else if ((long) delta < 0) {
> idx = clk & LVL_MASK;
You also need to handle that part. That's in fact the critical one :)
I'll rebase my series on top of that.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-10 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-10 15:46 [PATCH] timers: Use only bucket expiry for base->next_expiry value Anna-Maria Behnsen
2020-07-10 21:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2020-07-14 7:08 ` Anna-Maria Behnsen
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=20200710214458.GA31351@lenoir \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--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