From: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com,
Lei Chen <lei.chen@smartx.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] time/timekeeping: Fix possible inconsistencies in _COARSE clockids
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2025 16:22:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANDhNCqzHYJfaap5-TYPmtbaPm6AkS85hKdeSnprhEqMCAYcPw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877c4q5c9i.ffs@tglx>
On Sat, Mar 15, 2025 at 12:23 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14 2025 at 17:37, John Stultz wrote:
> > Here because we did not accumulate anything, we have a window
> > where the _COARSE clockids that don't utilize the mult*offset
> > value, can see an inconsistency.
> >
> > So to fix this, rework the timekeeping_advance() logic a bit
> > so that when we are called from do_adjtimex() and the offset
> > is smaller then cycle_interval, that we call
> > timekeeping_forward(), to first accumulate the sub-interval
> > time into xtime_nsec. Then with no unaccumulated cycles in
> > offset, we can do the mult adjustment without worry of the
> > subtraction having an impact.
>
> It's a smart solution. I briefly pondered something similar, but I'm not
> really fond of the fact, that it causes a clock_was_set() event for no
> good reason.
>
> clock_was_set() means that there is a time jump. But that's absolutely
> not the case with do_adjtimex() changing the frequency for quick
> adjustments. That does not affect continuity at all.
Oh, good point. I wasn't thinking clearly about the semantics, and
was being a little paranoid there (as most calls to
timekeeping_forward_now() have clock_was_set() calls that follow). I
suspect I can do away with that bit and avoid it. I'll respin later
this week.
> That event causes avoidable overhead in the kernel, but it's also
> exposed to user space via timerfd TFD_TIMER_CANCEL_ON_SET.
>
> I have no really strong opinion about that, but the route through
> clock_was_set() triggers my semantical mismatch sensors :)
Yeah, it's a fair point, thanks for raising it!
> > NOTE: This was implemented as a potential alternative to
> > Thomas' approach here:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87cyej5rid.ffs@tglx/
> >
> > And similarly, it needs some additional review and testing,
> > as it was developed while packing for conference travel.
>
> We can debate that next week over your favourite beverage :)
Looking forward to it :)
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-15 23:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-10 3:00 [PATCH] Fix rolling back of CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE Lei Chen
2025-03-13 17:20 ` John Stultz
2025-03-14 6:32 ` Lei Chen
2025-03-14 19:21 ` John Stultz
2025-03-15 9:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-03-14 19:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-03-14 22:50 ` John Stultz
2025-03-15 0:37 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] time/timekeeping: Fix possible inconsistencies in _COARSE clockids John Stultz
2025-03-15 0:37 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] selftests/timers: Improve skew_consistency by testing with other clockids John Stultz
2025-03-15 19:23 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] time/timekeeping: Fix possible inconsistencies in _COARSE clockids Thomas Gleixner
2025-03-15 23:22 ` John Stultz [this message]
2025-03-16 20:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2025-03-20 18:01 ` John Stultz
2025-03-21 16:17 ` 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=CANDhNCqzHYJfaap5-TYPmtbaPm6AkS85hKdeSnprhEqMCAYcPw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=lei.chen@smartx.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlichvar@redhat.com \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.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®