mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Matthieu CASTET <matthieu.castet@parrot.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Subject: Re: futex: Allow FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME with FUTEX_WAIT op
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:55:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160623195515.GD106079@f23x64.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f1dab560-41bb-9cc4-438f-0ade82c685fd@gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 08:41:09PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 06/23/2016 08:28 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 07:26:52PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Thu, 23 Jun 2016, Darren Hart wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 03:40:36PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > In my opinion, we should treat the timeout value as relative for FUTEX_WAIT
> > > > regardless of the CLOCK used.
> > > 
> > > Which requires even more changes as you have to select which clock you are
> > > using for adding the base time.
> > 
> > Right, something like the following?
> > 
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/futex.c b/kernel/futex.c
> > index 33664f7..c39d807 100644
> > --- a/kernel/futex.c
> > +++ b/kernel/futex.c
> > @@ -3230,8 +3230,12 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE6(futex, u32 __user *, uaddr, int, op, u32, val,
> >  			return -EINVAL;
> > 
> >  		t = timespec_to_ktime(ts);
> > -		if (cmd == FUTEX_WAIT)
> > -			t = ktime_add_safe(ktime_get(), t);
> > +		if (cmd == FUTEX_WAIT) {
> > +			if (cmd & FUTEX_CLOCK_REALTIME)
> > +				t = ktime_add_safe(ktime_get_real(), t);
> > +			else
> > +				t = ktime_add_safe(ktime_get(), t);
> > +		}
> >  		tp = &t;
> >  	}
> >  	/*
> 
> Just in the interests of readability/maintainability, might it not
> make some sense to recode the timeout handling for FUTEX_WAIT
> within futex_wait(). I think that part of the reason we're in this
> mess of inconsistency is that timeout interpretation is being handled
> at too many different points in the code.


I agree, that is indeed why I missed it in my original patch.


> 
> > And as a follow-on, what is the reason for FUTEX_LOCK_PI only using
> > CLOCK_REALTIME? It seems reasonable to me that a user may want to wait a
> > specific amount of time, regardless of wall time.
> 
> Yes, that's another weird inconsistency.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> -- 
> Michael Kerrisk
> Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
> Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
> 

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-23 19:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-20 14:26 Matthieu CASTET
2016-06-23  4:48 ` Darren Hart
2016-06-23  7:18   ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-23 10:52     ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-06-23 13:40       ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-23 16:16         ` Darren Hart
2016-06-23 17:26           ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-23 18:28             ` Darren Hart
2016-06-23 18:41               ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-06-23 19:55                 ` Darren Hart [this message]
2016-06-23 20:31                   ` Darren Hart
     [not found]                     ` <d8bcb621-012e-f34c-4cf9-2d09aa23a43c@gmail.com>
2016-06-24  9:52                       ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-24 10:00                         ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-07-06 18:57                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-23 18:35           ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-06-23 19:53             ` Darren Hart
2016-06-24  8:13               ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2016-06-23 10:53   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)

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=20160623195515.GD106079@f23x64.localdomain \
    --to=dvhart@infradead.org \
    --cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthieu.castet@parrot.com \
    --cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --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®