public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@intel.com>,
	James Simmons <jsimmons@infradead.org>,
	"devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
	"Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2] staging: lustre: ldlm: pl_recalc time handling is wrong
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 16:21:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4839295.T6k2aHkh3K@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161110122108.GA7580@kroah.com>

James Simmons reports:
> The ldlm_pool field pl_recalc_time is set to the current
> monotonic clock value but the interval period is calculated
> with the wall clock. This means the interval period will
> always be far larger than the pl_recalc_period, which is
> just a small interval time period. The correct thing to
> do is to use monotomic clock current value instead of the
> wall clocks value when calculating recalc_interval_sec.

This broke when I converted the 32-bit get_seconds() into
ktime_get_{real_,}seconds() inconsistently. Either
one of those two would have worked, but mixing them
does not.

Staying with the original intention of the patch, this
changes the ktime_get_seconds() calls into ktime_get_real_seconds(),
using real time instead of mononic time.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.4+
Fixes: 8f83409cf238 ("staging/lustre: use 64-bit time for pl_recalc")
Reported-by: James Simmons <jsimmons@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
v2: James' patch was similarly incomplete to mine, as it only
addressed some of the calls. With this new version, all ktime
accessors use the same time domain.

diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_pool.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_pool.c
index 19831c555c49..b820309d70e3 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_pool.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_pool.c
@@ -356,10 +356,10 @@ static int ldlm_pool_recalc(struct ldlm_pool *pl)
 	u32 recalc_interval_sec;
 	int count;
 
-	recalc_interval_sec = ktime_get_seconds() - pl->pl_recalc_time;
+	recalc_interval_sec = ktime_get_real_seconds() - pl->pl_recalc_time;
 	if (recalc_interval_sec > 0) {
 		spin_lock(&pl->pl_lock);
-		recalc_interval_sec = ktime_get_seconds() - pl->pl_recalc_time;
+		recalc_interval_sec = ktime_get_real_seconds() - pl->pl_recalc_time;
 
 		if (recalc_interval_sec > 0) {
 			/*
@@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ static int ldlm_pool_recalc(struct ldlm_pool *pl)
 				    count);
 	}
 
-	recalc_interval_sec = pl->pl_recalc_time - ktime_get_seconds() +
+	recalc_interval_sec = pl->pl_recalc_time - ktime_get_real_seconds() +
 			      pl->pl_recalc_period;
 	if (recalc_interval_sec <= 0) {
 		/* DEBUG: should be re-removed after LU-4536 is fixed */
@@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ int ldlm_pool_init(struct ldlm_pool *pl, struct ldlm_namespace *ns,
 
 	spin_lock_init(&pl->pl_lock);
 	atomic_set(&pl->pl_granted, 0);
-	pl->pl_recalc_time = ktime_get_seconds();
+	pl->pl_recalc_time = ktime_get_real_seconds();
 	atomic_set(&pl->pl_lock_volume_factor, 1);
 
 	atomic_set(&pl->pl_grant_rate, 0);

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-11-10 15:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-08  2:47 [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: pl_recalc time handling is wrong James Simmons
2016-11-09  3:50 ` [lustre-devel] " Dilger, Andreas
2016-11-09 16:00   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10 12:21     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2016-11-10 15:01       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10 17:53         ` James Simmons
2016-11-10 15:21       ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2016-11-10 18:59         ` [PATCH v2] " James Simmons

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=4839295.T6k2aHkh3K@wuerfel \
    --to=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=andreas.dilger@intel.com \
    --cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jsimmons@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org \
    --cc=oleg.drokin@intel.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