From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Lingutla Chandrasekhar <clingutla@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, neeraju@codeaurora.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] timer: Forward timer base before migrating timers
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 11:45:42 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1801181141200.1847@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180117124442.24904-1-clingutla@codeaurora.org>
On Wed, 17 Jan 2018, Lingutla Chandrasekhar wrote:
> In case when timers are migrated to a CPU, after it exits
> idle, but before timer base is forwarded, either from
> run_timer_softirq()/mod_timer()/add_timer_on(), it's
> possible that migrated timers are queued, based on older
> clock value. This can cause delays in handling those timers.
>
> For example, consider below sequence of events:
>
> - CPU0 timer1 expires = 59969 and base->clk = 59131. So,
> timer is queued at level 2, with next expiry for this timer
> = 60032 (due to granularity addition).
> - CPU1 enters idle @60007, with next timer expiry @60020.
> - CPU1 exits idle.
> - CPU0 is hotplugged at 60009, and timers are migrated to
> CPU1, with new base->clk = 60007. timer1 is queued,
> based on 60007 at level 0, for immediate handling (in
> next timer softirq handling).
> - CPU1's base->clk is forwarded to 60009, so, in next sched
> timer interrupt, timer1 is not handled.
>
> The issue happens as timer wheel collects expired timers
> starting from the current clk's index onwards, but migrated
> timers, if enqueued, based on older clk value can result
> in their index being less than clk's current index.
> This can only happen if new base->clk is ahead of
> timer->expires, resulting in timer being queued at
> new base->clk's current index.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lingutla Chandrasekhar <clingutla@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraju@codeaurora.org>
That's still wrong.
The SOB chain should be:
SOB: Author
SOB: Handler/Transporter
SOB: Committer
So if you wrote te patch then Neeraj's SOB is wrong. If Neeraj wrote the
patch then the patch should contain a
From: Neeraj
line right at the top of the changelog.
If you both developed the patch then please use;
Co-developed-by: Neeraj
Signed-off-by: Neeraj
Signed-off-by; You
That would make you the Author in the git commit, but still preserve the
co-authorship.
Please clarify what applies to this particular patch.
Thanks,
tglx
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-18 10:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-17 12:44 Lingutla Chandrasekhar
2018-01-18 10:45 ` Thomas Gleixner [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=alpine.DEB.2.20.1801181141200.1847@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=clingutla@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=neeraju@codeaurora.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®