From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
fweisbec@gmail.com, arvind.chauhan@arm.com,
preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com, khilman@linaro.org,
Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] hrtimer: drop active hrtimer checks after adding it
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 23:30:41 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1407092321130.4357@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1404888801.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
On Wed, 9 Jul 2014, Viresh Kumar wrote:
So your patch series drops active hrtimer checks after adding it,
according to your subject line.
Quite useeul to drop something after adding it, right?
> hrtimer_start*() family never fails to enqueue a hrtimer to a clock-base. The
> only special case is when the hrtimer was in past. If it is getting enqueued to
> local CPUs's clock-base, we raise a softirq and exit, else we handle that on
> next interrupt on remote CPU.
>
> At several places in the kernel, we try to make sure if hrtimer was added
> properly or not by calling hrtimer_active(), like:
>
> hrtimer_start(timer, expires, mode);
> if (hrtimer_active(timer)) {
> /* Added successfully */
> } else {
> /* Was added in the past */
> }
>
> As hrtimer_start*() never fails, hrtimer_active() is guaranteed to return '1'.
> So, there is no point calling hrtimer_active().
Wrong as usual.
It's a common pattern that short timeouts are given which lead to
immediate expiry so the extra round through schedule is even more
pointless than the extra check.
Aside of that it's a long discussed issue that we really should tell
the caller right away that the timer was setup in the past and not
enqueued at all.
That requires to fixup a few call sites, but that'd far more valuable
than removing a few assumed to be pointless checks.
Thnaks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-09 21:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-09 6:55 [RFC 0/7] hrtimer: drop active hrtimer checks after adding it Viresh Kumar
2014-07-09 6:55 ` [RFC 7/7] net: don't check for active hrtimer " Viresh Kumar
2014-07-09 10:32 ` Chris Redpath
2014-07-09 10:44 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-09 10:48 ` Chris Redpath
2014-07-09 15:23 ` Viresh Kumar
2014-07-09 21:30 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2014-07-10 1:34 ` [RFC 0/7] hrtimer: drop active hrtimer checks " Frederic Weisbecker
2014-07-14 4:41 ` Viresh Kumar
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=alpine.DEB.2.10.1407092321130.4357@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=arvind.chauhan@arm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=khilman@linaro.org \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=viresh.kumar@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