mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: David Dillow <dave@thedillows.org>,
	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>,
	Roland Dreier <roland@topspin.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: poll() in 2.6 and beyond
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 17:42:16 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0403031737130.14503@chaos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0403031419280.3000@ppc970.osdl.org>

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Linus Torvalds wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2004, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> >
> > are being quashed by those who just like to argue. Therefore,
> > I wrote some code that emulates the environment in which I
> > discovered the poll failure.
>
> No. I think you wrote some code that shows the bug you have.
>
> Your "poll()" function IS BUGGY.
>
> Look at this:
>
> 	static size_t poll(struct file *fp, struct poll_table_struct *wait)
> 	{
> 	    size_t poll_flag;
> 	    size_t flags;
> 	    DEB(printk(KERN_INFO"%s : poll() called\n", devname));
> 	    poll_wait(fp, &pwait, wait);
> 	    DEB(printk(KERN_INFO"%s : poll() returned\n", devname));
> 	    spin_lock_irqsave(&rtc_lock, flags);
> 	    poll_flag = global_poll_flag;
> ***	    global_poll_flag = 0;
> 	    spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rtc_lock, flags);
> 	    return poll_flag;
> 	}
>
> you are clearing your own flag that says "there are events pending", so if
> you call your "poll()" function twice, on the second time it will say
> "there are no events pending".
>

But I am clearing it under a spin-lock.

> You should clear the "events pending" flag only when you literally remove
> the event (ie at "read()" time, not at "poll()" time). Because the
> select() code _will_ call down to the "poll()" functions multiple times if
> it gets woken up for any bogus reason.

Oh wow. That is the BUG! I didn't know it could call in multiple times.

>
> See if that fixes anything.
>
> It may well be that 2.6.x calls down to the low-level driver "poll()"
> function more than it should. That would be a mis-feature, and worth
> looking at, but I think you should try to fix your test first, since right
> now the bug is questionable.
>
> 			Linus

And YES! If I clear the flag only after it is read. It "fixes" the
observed problem!

I don't know if it is a BUG or a FEATURE, but you put your
finger right on it!  Thanks.


Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.24 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
            Note 96.31% of all statistics are fiction.



  reply	other threads:[~2004-03-03 22:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1vmPm-4lU-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <1vonq-6dr-37@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]   ` <1voGY-6vC-41@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]     ` <1vpjt-7dl-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]       ` <1vpCV-7wY-41@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]         ` <1vpWa-7Py-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-03-02 22:53           ` Bill Davidsen
2004-03-02 22:57             ` Roland Dreier
2004-03-02 23:32             ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-03  0:07               ` John Muir
2004-03-03  1:18                 ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-03  4:04                   ` Roland Dreier
2004-03-03 12:38                     ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-03 14:29                       ` Davide Libenzi
2004-03-03  3:57               ` David Dillow
2004-03-03 18:23                 ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-03 19:29                   ` Dave Dillow
2004-03-03 20:10                     ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-03 22:25                   ` Linus Torvalds
2004-03-03 22:42                     ` Richard B. Johnson [this message]
2004-03-03 23:14                       ` Linus Torvalds
2004-03-03 22:52                     ` Linus Torvalds
2004-03-03 23:07                       ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-03  3:06 linux
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-03-02 18:21 Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-02 20:04 ` Roland Dreier
2004-03-02 20:24   ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-02 21:00     ` Roland Dreier
2004-03-02 21:26       ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-02 21:39         ` Roland Dreier
2004-03-02 21:59           ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-02 22:41             ` Dave Dillow
2004-03-02 22:56             ` Roland Dreier
2004-03-02 23:16               ` Richard B. Johnson
2004-03-02 23:21                 ` Roland Dreier

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=Pine.LNX.4.53.0403031737130.14503@chaos \
    --to=root@chaos.analogic.com \
    --cc=dave@thedillows.org \
    --cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=roland@topspin.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.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®