From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1162990Ab2GLX7g (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:59:36 -0400 Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:39190 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161882Ab2GLX7d (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:59:33 -0400 Message-ID: <4FFF64A8.8040504@us.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:58:32 -0700 From: John Stultz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120615 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jiri Bohac CC: Linux Kernel , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Prarit Bhargava , Thomas Gleixner , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Fix for leapsecond caused hrtimer/futex issue (updated) References: <1341960205-56738-1-git-send-email-johnstul@us.ibm.com> <4FFCB287.80701@us.ibm.com> <20120712224334.GA32620@midget.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20120712224334.GA32620@midget.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12071223-2398-0000-0000-00000874C265 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/12/2012 03:43 PM, Jiri Bohac wrote: > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 03:53:59PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: >> On 07/10/2012 03:43 PM, John Stultz wrote: >>> Over the weekend, Thomas got a chance to review the leap second fix >>> in more detail and had a few additional changes he wanted to make >>> to improve performance as well as style. >>> >>> So this iteration includes his modifications. >>> >>> Once merged, I'll be working to get the backports finished as quickly >>> as I can and sent to -stable. > looking at the proposed 2.6.32.y stable patch at: > http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/jstultz/linux.git;a=commitdiff;h=18d208632bf17aed56c581b882868b2be44be71e;hp=6d224606bb8eec78027522d6dd5abfea8108c41a > Is this the final version you are about to send to -stable? No, this isn't what I'm sending to -stable. That was my backport that was done was prior to merging Thomas' modifications from over the weekend. Having, so far, done this backporting 3 times or so, I figured I'd just wait until something got committed upstream before trying to backport it again. :) > In 2.6.32 timekeeping_leap_insert() is not called from the timer > interrupt, but from the leap_timer hrtimer. > > I think the new clock_was_set_timer will thus not be called by > irq_exit() because TIMER_SOFTIRQ has not been raised. Unless > TIMER_SOFTIRQ is raised, clock_was_set() will not be called until > the next periodic timer interrupt, correct? > > Wouldn't the original schedule_work() approach work better for > 2.6.32? > > Or do you plan backporting the most recent version to 2.6.32? I'll be backporting & testing the most recent version once it is committed upstream. thanks -john