[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090218210940.GA8094@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:09:40 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com, shemminger@...tta.com,
kaber@...sh.net, davem@...emloft.net, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Q: timer_stats_account_xtimer() should reset ->start_site?
On 02/18, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> +__mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires, bool pending_only)
> {
> struct tvec_base *base, *new_base;
> unsigned long flags;
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = 0;
>
> timer_stats_timer_set_start_info(timer);
> BUG_ON(!timer->function);
> @@ -603,6 +606,9 @@ int __mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires)
> if (timer_pending(timer)) {
> detach_timer(timer, 0);
> ret = 1;
> + } else {
> + if (pending_only)
> + goto out_unlock;
At first glance, I thought this is not exactly right wrt timer stats when
__mod_timer(pending_only => true) fails.
But it turns out, I just can't understand the behaviour of /proc/timer_stats.
The first task which does __mod_timer() fills ->start_site/etc, this info
is cleared by del_timer(). This looks correct.
But when __run_hrtimer/__run_timers report this timer to /proc/timer_stats
we don't clear this info. If the timer expires, and then another task uses
the same timer, timer_stats will report the same ->start_site/pid twice.
Is it correct? Perhaps timer_stats_account_timer() should reset start_site?
Or we can kill the "if (timer->start_site)" in _set_start_info().
Or I missed something. Hmm... and del_timer_sync() doesn't clear start_site.
Confused, please help.
Oleg.
--
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