From: Ed Cashin <ed.cashin@acm.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, y2038@lists.linaro.org
Cc: Tina Ruchandani <ruchandani.tina@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Y2038] [PATCH] aoe: Use 64-bit timestamp in frame
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 21:23:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5552A778.6070603@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2349651.fBUtehr528@wuerfel>
On 05/12/2015 07:14 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 May 2015 11:44:21 Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> There are of course multiple ways to do this. One way would be to
>> change the code to work on 32-bit nanoseconds instead of 32-bit
>> microseconds. This requires proving that the we cannot exceed
>> 4.29 seconds of round-trip time in calc_rttavg().
>> Is that a valid assumption or not?
>>
>> If not, we could replace do_gettimeofday() with ktime_get_ts64().
>> This will ensure we don't need a 64-bit division when converting
>> the ts64 to a 32-bit microsecond value, and combined with the
>> conversion is still no slower than do_gettimeofday(), and it
>> still avoids the double bookkeeping because it uses a monotonic
>> timebase that is robust against settimeofday.
> Two other approaches that occurred to me later:
>
> - introduce common ktime_get_ms(), ktime_get_us(), ktime_get_real_ms()
> and ktime_get_real_is() interfaces, to match the other interfaces
> we already provide. These could be done as efficiently or better
> than what aoe does manually today.
>
> - change the timebase that is used for the computations in aoe to use
> scaled nanoseconds instead of microseconds. Using
>
> u32 time = ktime_get_ns() >> 10;
>
> would give you a similar range and precision as microseconds, but
> completely avoid integer division. You could also use a different
> shift value to either extend the range beyond 71 minutes, or the
> extend the precision to something below a microsecond. This would
> be the most efficient implementation, but also require significant
> changes to the driver.
>
That is an interesting idea. People do care about aoe_deadsecs being
pretty accurate, so there would need to be a way to make that remain
accurate. The driver will fail outstanding I/O to the target and mark it
as "down" after unsuccessfully retransmitting commands to the target
for a number of seconds equal to aoe_deadsecs.
As to the efficient ktime_get_us idea, that sounds appealing since you
mention that they would be efficient.
Thanks for the analysis.
--
Ed
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-13 1:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-11 2:35 [PATCH] aoe: Use 64-bit timestamp in frame Tina Ruchandani
2015-05-11 15:38 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-05-11 15:59 ` Ed Cashin
2015-05-12 1:00 ` Ed Cashin
2015-05-12 9:44 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-05-12 11:14 ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
2015-05-13 1:23 ` Ed Cashin [this message]
2015-05-13 8:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-05-14 0:47 ` Ed Cashin
2015-05-12 11:21 ` Ed Cashin
2015-05-13 1:26 ` Ed Cashin
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=5552A778.6070603@acm.org \
--to=ed.cashin@acm.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ruchandani.tina@gmail.com \
--cc=y2038@lists.linaro.org \
/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