[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1157222493.29250.383.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 20:41:33 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frank v Waveren <fvw@....cx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] prevent timespec/timeval to ktime_t overflow
On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 20:13 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Fun, here is a version with a bigabyte blocker.
>
> Your patch triggers waaaaaaay early.
>
> netconsole: remote IP 192.168.2.33
> netconsole: remote ethernet address 00:0d:56:c6:c6:cc
> Initializing CPU#0
> PID hash table entries: 4096 (order: 12, 32768 bytes)
> time.c: Using 14.318180 MHz WALL HPET GTOD HPET/TSC timer.
> time.c: Detected 3400.238 MHz processor.
> ktime_set: -1157140842 : 0
-------------^ !!!!!!!
> BUG: warning at include/linux/ktime.h:84/ktime_set()
>
> Call Trace:
> <IRQ> [<ffffffff80247021>] hrtimer_run_queues+0x10e/0x211
This seems to happen inside hrtimer_get_softirq_time().
wall_to_monotonic is negative.
Why does the check trigger ? We compare a "long", which contains a
negative value against some positive constant.
ktime_t ktime_set(const long secs, const unsigned long nsecs)
{
if (unlikely(secs >= KTIME_SEC_MAX)) {
where KTIME_SEC_MAX is 0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF / 1000 000 000 =
9223372036 == 0x225C17D04,
which is compared against
-1157140842 == 0xFFFFFFFFBB076E96
This smells like gcc magic. Can you please disassemble the code in
question ?
> I wonder if this is related to the occasional hrtimr_run_queues() lockup
> which Andi is encountering.
Hmm, not sure.
tglx
--
VGER BF report: H 1.60283e-12
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists