From: John <me@privacy.net>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: tglx@timesys.com, mingo@elte.hu, johnstul@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: Incorrect behavior of timer_settime() for absolute dates in the past
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:32:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <456AF6F5.7050201@privacy.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <455D7CDD.9000202@privacy.net>
John wrote:
> I'm playing with the POSIX timers API. My platform is x86 running Linux
> 2.6.18.1 patched with the high-resolution timer subsystem.
>
> http://www.tglx.de/hrtimers.html
>
> I'm seeing unexpected behavior from timer_settime().
>
> int timer_settime(timer_t timerid, int flags,
> const struct itimerspec *value, struct itimerspec *ovalue);
>
> timer_settime() is used to arm a timer. If the TIMER_ABSTIME flag is
> set, then the timer should fire when the appropriate clock reaches the
> date specified by value. If that date is in the past, the timer should
> fire immediately.
>
> The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 6 states:
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/timer_getoverrun.html
>
>
> "If the flag TIMER_ABSTIME is set in the argument flags, timer_settime()
> shall behave as if the time until next expiration is set to be equal to
> the difference between the absolute time specified by the it_value
> member of value and the current value of the clock associated with
> timerid. That is, the timer shall expire when the clock reaches the
> value specified by the it_value member of value. If the specified time
> has already passed, the function shall succeed and the expiration
> notification shall be made."
>
> In my tests, when timer_settime() is called with an expiration date in
> the past, the timer still takes some time to fire.
>
> Here's a run-down of the code provided as an attachment:
>
> I switch to a SCHED_RR scheduling policy. In other words, whenever my
> process wants the CPU, it gets it. (No other SCHED_RR or SCHED_FIFO
> processes on the system.) I mask the signal that will be delivered on
> timer expiration. I then arm a timer with an expiration date in the
> past, check whether the signal is pending, and block waiting for the
> signal. I then print how long I've had to wait.
>
> # ./a.out
> RESOLUTION=1 ns
> NOW=969.735545919
> SLEEPING 1 SECOND...
> NOW=970.735581398
> NOW=970.735613525
> NOW=970.735749017
> nsdiff=135492 ns i.e. 135.5 µs
>
> Any ideas?
Is there a better forum to discuss this matter?
Regards.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-27 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-17 9:11 John
2006-11-27 14:32 ` John [this message]
2006-11-28 2:09 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 13:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=456AF6F5.7050201@privacy.net \
--to=me@privacy.net \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@timesys.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome