public inbox for ltp@lists.linux.it
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [patch V2 00/20] timer: Refactor the timer wheel
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:11:27 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160623151127.GA20808@rei.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160623135803.636.qmail@ns.sciencehorizons.net>

Hi!
> Two points:
> 1) sigtimedwait() is unusual in that it uses the jiffies timer.  Most
>    system call timeouts (including specifically the one in FUTEX_WAIT)
>    use the high-resolution timer subsystem, which is a whole different
>    animal with tighter guarantees, and

That is likely POSIX conformance bug, since POSIX explicitly states that
sigtimedwait() shall use CLOCK_MONOTONIC to measure the timeout.

"If the Monotonic Clock option is supported, the CLOCK_MONOTONIC clock
shall be used to measure the time interval specified by the timeout
argument."

> 2) The worst-case error in tglx's proposal is 1/8 of the requested
>    timeout: the wakeup is after 112.5% of the requested time, plus
>    one tick.  This is well within your requested accuracy.  (For very
>    short timeouts, the "plus one tick" can dominate the percentage error.)

Hmm, that still does not add up to the number in the original email
where it says time_elapsed: 1.197057. As far as I can tell the worst
case for a tick is CONFIG_HZ=100 so one tick is 0.01s and even after
that we get 118.7% since we requested 1s. But that may be caused by the
fact that the test uses gettimeofday() to measure the elapsed time, it
should use CLOCK_MONOTONIC instead.

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-06-23 15:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20160617121134.417319325@linutronix.de>
     [not found] ` <1466581044.3188.34.camel@gmail.com>
2016-06-22  8:44   ` [LTP] [patch V2 00/20] timer: Refactor the timer wheel Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-22  9:06     ` Mike Galbraith
2016-06-22 13:37       ` Mike Galbraith
2016-06-22 10:28     ` Cyril Hrubis
2016-06-23  8:27       ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-23 11:47         ` Cyril Hrubis
     [not found]           ` <20160623135803.636.qmail@ns.sciencehorizons.net>
2016-06-23 14:10             ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-23 15:11             ` Cyril Hrubis [this message]
2016-06-23 15:21               ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-23 16:31                 ` Cyril Hrubis
     [not found]     ` <20160626190025.GC11162@amd>
2016-06-26 19:21       ` Arjan van de Ven

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=20160623151127.GA20808@rei.lan \
    --to=chrubis@suse.cz \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    /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