From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Olivier Langlois <olivier@trillion01.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] posix-cpu-timers: fix wrong timer initialization
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:36:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130429103600.GB31700@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1367216762-3933-2-git-send-email-kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 02:26:02AM -0400, kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com wrote:
> From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
>
> Currently glibc's rt/tst-cputimer1 testcase is spradically fail because
> a timer created by timer_create() may faire earlier than an argument.
>
> There are two faults. 1) cpu_timer_sample_group() adds task_delta_exec(current).
> But it is definity silly idea especially when multi thread. cputimer should
> be initialized by committed exec runtime. i.e. it should not be added
> scheduler delta. 2) expire time should be current time + timeout. In the other
> words, expire calculation should take care scheduler delta.
I'm sorry, that completely fails to parse.
> -/*
> - * Lock/unlock the current runqueue - to extract task statistics:
> - */
> -extern unsigned long long task_delta_exec(struct task_struct *);
Yay.. this thing dying is good -- it did seem strange to compute the current
delta but not also read sum_exec_runtime under the same lock.
> diff --git a/kernel/posix-cpu-timers.c b/kernel/posix-cpu-timers.c
> index e56be4c..dc61bc3 100644
> --- a/kernel/posix-cpu-timers.c
> +++ b/kernel/posix-cpu-timers.c
> @@ -203,12 +203,10 @@ posix_cpu_clock_set(const clockid_t which_clock, const struct timespec *tp)
> return error;
> }
>
> -
> -/*
> - * Sample a per-thread clock for the given task.
> - */
> -static int cpu_clock_sample(const clockid_t which_clock, struct task_struct *p,
> - union cpu_time_count *cpu)
> +static int do_cpu_clock_sample(const clockid_t which_clock,
> + struct task_struct *p,
> + bool add_delta,
> + union cpu_time_count *cpu)
Would not thread_cputime() (to mirror thread_group_cputime()) be a better name?
Also, I would think both these functions would be a good place to insert a
comment explaining the difference between timer and clock.
> +static int cpu_clock_sample(const clockid_t which_clock, struct task_struct *p,
> + union cpu_time_count *cpu)
> +{
> + return do_cpu_clock_sample(which_clock, p, true, cpu);
> +}
> @@ -700,7 +707,7 @@ static int posix_cpu_timer_set(struct k_itimer *timer, int flags,
> * check if it's already passed. In short, we need a sample.
> */
> if (CPUCLOCK_PERTHREAD(timer->it_clock)) {
> - cpu_clock_sample(timer->it_clock, p, &val);
> + do_cpu_clock_sample(timer->it_clock, p, false, &val);
> } else {
> cpu_timer_sample_group(timer->it_clock, p, &val);
> }
This would suggest:
static inline int cpu_timer_sample(const clockid_t which_clock, struct task_struct *p, union cpu_time_count *cpu)
{
return do_cpu_clock_sample(which_clock, p, false, cpu);
}
That would preserve the: cpu_{timer,clock}_sample{,_group}() form.
> @@ -749,7 +756,13 @@ static int posix_cpu_timer_set(struct k_itimer *timer, int flags,
> }
>
> if (new_expires.sched != 0 && !(flags & TIMER_ABSTIME)) {
> - cpu_time_add(timer->it_clock, &new_expires, val);
> + union cpu_time_count now;
> +
> + if (CPUCLOCK_PERTHREAD(timer->it_clock))
> + cpu_clock_sample(timer->it_clock, p, &now);
> + else
> + cpu_clock_sample_group(timer->it_clock, p, &now);
This triggered a pattern match against earlier in this function; but they're
different now; timer vs clock. So nothing to merge...
So I don't mind the code changes, although its still not entirely clear to me
what exact problem is fixed how; and thus the Changelog needs TLC.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-29 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-29 6:26 [PATCH 1/2] posix-cpu-timers: fix acounting delta_exec twice kosaki.motohiro
2013-04-29 6:26 ` [PATCH 2/2] posix-cpu-timers: fix wrong timer initialization kosaki.motohiro
2013-04-29 10:36 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-04-29 17:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 18:53 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 19:17 ` [BUGFIX PATCH 3/2] posix-cpu-timers: check_thread_timers() uses task_sched_runtime() KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 19:18 ` [PATCH 4/2] sched: task_sched_runtime introduce micro optimization KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 19:19 ` [PATCH 5/2] posix-cpu-timers: cleanup cpu_{clock,timer}_sample{,_group} KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-04-29 19:20 ` [PATCH 6/2] posix-cpu-timers: timer functions must use timer time instead of clock time KOSAKI Motohiro
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=20130429103600.GB31700@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=olivier@trillion01.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®