From: imran.f.khan@oracle.com
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
john.stultz@linaro.org, sboyd@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Query about timer wheel API
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2024 00:07:11 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <254db089-b5b8-4461-bd42-2cbfea7092b9@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241225110146.482-1-hdanton@sina.com>
Hello Hillf,
On 25/12/2024 10:01 pm, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 23:41:48 +1100 imran.f.khan@oracle.com
>>
>> the query was not about why its (not) working with my module. The test module, in its
>> current form, is just to show that a timer-wheel timer could be inserted in timer list
>> of an offlined CPU.
>
> Your module helps understand your query.
>>
>> What you have suggested, we are already doing it in RDS code (mentioned in my earlier messages).
>> Also just using cpu_online may not be enough, unless we do it under get/put_online_cpus.
>>
> Same pattern is in smp_call_function_single() where ckecking cpu after get_cpu().
> But different one in smp_call_on_cpu().
>
>> If you see, my query was more towards, what should "add_timer_on" do for such cases or
>> can we have another function like try_add_timer_on that tries to put the timer on specific
>> CPU, but puts it else where if that CPU is offline. Is it worth having such an interface
>> or should we stick to the current approach of fixing this on the caller side.
>
> The number of reports that timer is queued on offline cpu in 2024 alone raises
> the (known) question -- what sense could be made by adding check of cpu in the
> pathes like queuing work and arming timer?
Sorry, I could not understand the last part of your comment. Do you mean that its a
known issue that should be addressed or do you mean that my use case of adding delayed_work
and/or timer to offlined CPUs is an invalid use case and should be fixed on the caller side ?
Thanks,
Imran
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-26 13:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-23 0:14 imran.f.khan
2024-12-23 12:51 ` Hillf Danton
2024-12-23 14:20 ` imran.f.khan
2024-12-24 10:41 ` Hillf Danton
2024-12-24 12:41 ` imran.f.khan
2024-12-25 11:01 ` Hillf Danton
2024-12-26 13:07 ` imran.f.khan [this message]
2024-12-27 10:30 ` Hillf Danton
2025-01-15 10:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-01-15 13:48 ` imran.f.khan
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=254db089-b5b8-4461-bd42-2cbfea7092b9@oracle.com \
--to=imran.f.khan@oracle.com \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®