From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
christoph@lameter.com, kenneth.w.chen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH rc1-mm3] timers: simplify locking
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 15:28:02 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42493BC2.69006FFC@tv-sign.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050328180502.4ddd9855.akpm@osdl.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> wrote:
> >
> > This is the last one, I promise.
> > On top of "[PATCH rc1-mm3] timers: kill timer_list->lock", see
> > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=111193319932543
>
> I thought that earlier patch was a bit weird
A bit weird, or too weird to be acceptable?
I am very much interested in your and others opinion. You do not like
this fake_timer_base or you don't like the idea that the timer is always
locked through timer_base() ?
These 2 patches should be cleanuped of course.
struct XXX {
spinlock_t lock;
timer_list *running_timer;
};
struct XXX fake_timer_base;
struct tvec_t_base_s {
struct XXX xxx;
long timer_jiffies;
tvec_t tv1;
...
}
struct timer_list {
...
struct XXX *_base;
}
So tvec_t_base_s is used only in __mod_timer() for new_base. This cleanup
would be trivial and without changes in timer.o.
However this global fake_timer_base is really neccessary for this patch and
it is really wierd.
But I like the fact that __mod_timer() takes 2 locks sequentially instead
of 3 at once.
> and I think it would be better
> to get to the bottom of these problems which people have been reporting in
> the 2.6.12-rc1-mm3 timer code before adding more things, don't you?
I just can't imagine how this "del_timer_sync instead of del_singleshot_timer
in schedule_timeout" can reveal any bug in these patches. del_singleshot_timer
calls del_timer_sync anyway when the timer is inactive. The only difference
is that now schedule_timeout()->del_timer_sync() actually deletes this timer
when the caller was waken by a signal/event. And that deletion is very simple,
it just "can't be wrong", and it adds LIST_POISON to timer->entry.
But you are right of course. It is better to forget about these new patches
for a while.
Oleg.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-29 11:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-28 16:50 Oleg Nesterov
2005-03-28 20:07 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-03-29 11:27 ` Oleg Nesterov
2005-03-29 2:05 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-29 11:28 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
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=42493BC2.69006FFC@tv-sign.ru \
--to=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=christoph@lameter.com \
--cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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®