netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: annie li <annie.li@oracle.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, ian.campbell@citrix.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, david.vrabel@citrix.com,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
	jianhai luan <jianhai.luan@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net] xen-netback: add the scenario which now beyond the range time_after_eq().
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 16:55:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5260F76F.2080508@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52610CD202000078000FC00B@nat28.tlf.novell.com>


On 2013-10-18 16:26, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 18.10.13 at 10:14, annie li <annie.li@oracle.com> wrote:
>> On 2013-10-18 15:43, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 17.10.13 at 18:38, annie li <annie.li@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2013-10-17 17:26, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, the issue only can be  reproduced in 32-bit Dom0 (Beyond
>>>>>> MAX_ULONG/2 in 64-bit will need long long time)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the gap should be think all environment even now extending 480+.
>>>>>> if now fall in the gap,  one timer will be pending and replenish will be
>>>>>> in time.  Please run the attachment test program.
>>>>> Not sure what this is supposed to tell me. I recognize that there
>>>>> are overflow conditions not handled properly, but (a) I have a
>>>>> hard time thinking of a sensible guest that sits idle for over 240
>>>>> days (host uptime usually isn't even coming close to that due to
>>>>> maintenance requirements) and (b) if there is such a sensible
>>>>> guest, then I can't see why dealing with one being idle for over
>>>>> 480 days should be required too.
>>>>>
>>>> If the guest contains multiple NICs, that situation probably happens
>>>> when one NIC keeps idle and others work under load. BTW, how do you get
>>>> the 240?
>>> 2^31 / 100 / 60 / 60 / 24
>>>
>>> Obviously with HZ=1000 the span would be smaller by a factor
>>> of 10, which would make it even more clear that doubling the
>>> span doesn't really help.
>> My understanding is this patch does not simply double the span, it is
>> just stricter than the original one. Please check my previous comments,
>> I paste it here.
> No, the code (on a 32-bit arch) just _can't_ handle jiffies differences
> beyond 2^32, no matter how cleverly you use the respective macros.
> All arithmetic there is done modulo 2^32.

On 32-bit arch, the jiffies difference beyond 2^32 is only in theory, 
and the real value of jiffies would wrap around after 2^32. Then it will 
still be verified by time_in_range_open, the code will either replenish 
the credit or hit the timer soon.

Thanks
Annie

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-10-18  8:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-16 17:22 [PATCH net] xen-netback: add the scenario which now beyond the range time_after_eq() Jason Luan
2013-10-17  8:26 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2013-10-17  9:02   ` jianhai luan
2013-10-17  9:04     ` jianhai luan
2013-10-17  9:15     ` David Vrabel
2013-10-17 10:19       ` jianhai luan
2013-10-17 10:31         ` David Vrabel
2013-10-17 13:59           ` jianhai luan
2013-10-17 14:06             ` Wei Liu
2013-10-17 15:23               ` jianhai luan
2013-10-17 15:25                 ` David Vrabel
2013-10-17 15:41                   ` jianhai luan
2013-10-18  6:48                     ` annie li
2013-10-17  9:26     ` Jan Beulich
2013-10-17  9:59       ` jianhai luan
2013-10-17 16:38       ` annie li
2013-10-17 16:41         ` Wei Liu
2013-10-18  1:59           ` annie li
2013-10-18  7:43         ` Jan Beulich
2013-10-18  8:14           ` annie li
2013-10-18  8:26             ` Jan Beulich
2013-10-18  8:40               ` David Laight
2013-10-18 11:24                 ` Wei Liu
2013-10-23  8:02                   ` jianhai luan
2013-10-23 16:07                     ` Jan Beulich
2013-10-24 10:04                       ` David Laight
2013-10-24 11:34                       ` jianhai luan
2013-10-18  8:55               ` annie li [this message]
2013-10-17 16:21   ` annie li
2013-10-18  7:41     ` Jan Beulich

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=5260F76F.2080508@oracle.com \
    --to=annie.li@oracle.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
    --cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
    --cc=jianhai.luan@oracle.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).