From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
To: john cooper <john.cooper@timesys.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Olaf Kirch <okir@suse.de>
Subject: Re: RT and Cascade interrupts
Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 13:35:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1117312557.10746.6.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4298AED8.8000408@timesys.com>
lau den 28.05.2005 Klokka 13:48 (-0400) skreiv john cooper:
> The other possibility to fix the original problem within
> the scope of the RPC code was to replace the bit state of
> RPC_TASK_HAS_TIMER with a count so we don't obscure the
> fact the timer was requeued during the preemption window.
> This happens as rpc_run_timer() does an unconditional
> clear_bit(RPC_TASK_HAS_TIMER,..) before returning.
>
> Another would be to check timer->base/timer_pending()
> in rpc_run_timer() and to omit doing a clear_bit()
> if the timer is found to have been requeued.
Could you please explain why you think such a scenario is possible? The
timer functions themselves should never be causing a re-queue, and every
iteration through the loop in __rpc_execute() should cause any pending
timer to be killed, as should rpc_release_task().
That's why we can use del_singleshot_timer_sync() in the first place:
because there is no recursion, and no re-queueing that can cause races.
I don't see how either preemption or RT will change that (and if they
do, then _that_ is the real bug that needs fixing).
Cheers,
Trond
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-28 20:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-27 16:47 Oleg Nesterov
2005-05-27 23:37 ` john cooper
2005-05-28 8:52 ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-05-28 14:02 ` john cooper
2005-05-28 16:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-05-28 17:48 ` john cooper
2005-05-28 20:35 ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
2005-05-29 3:12 ` john cooper
2005-05-29 7:40 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-05-30 21:32 ` john cooper
2005-05-31 23:09 ` john cooper
2005-06-01 14:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-06-01 18:05 ` john cooper
2005-06-01 18:31 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-06-01 19:20 ` john cooper
2005-06-01 19:46 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-06-01 20:21 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-06-01 20:59 ` john cooper
2005-06-01 22:51 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-06-01 23:09 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-06-02 3:31 ` john cooper
2005-06-02 4:26 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-06-09 23:17 ` George Anzinger
2005-06-09 23:52 ` john cooper
2005-05-29 11:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-05-29 13:58 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-05-30 14:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-05-28 22:17 ` Trond Myklebust
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-05-12 14:43 Daniel Walker
2005-05-13 7:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-05-13 13:12 ` john cooper
2005-05-24 16:32 ` john cooper
2005-05-27 7:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-05-27 13:53 ` john cooper
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=1117312557.10746.6.camel@lade.trondhjem.org \
--to=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
--cc=john.cooper@timesys.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=okir@suse.de \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®