[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A9A1701.2070703@codeaurora.org>
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 02:06:57 -0400
From: Ashwin Chaugule <ashwinc@...eaurora.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/1] hrtimers: Cache next hrtimer
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Hmm. I'd really like to know why that's behaving different.
>
> Usually there are only timers in the CLOCK_MONOTONIC base during
> boot. CLOCK_REALTIME base should be empty most of the time. If my
> theory is correct then the number of reprogram events is correct as
> well because base[MONOTONIC]->first is always the one which armed the
> timer.
>
>
>
Okay, I think I figured this out :)
I added some debug to find out how many timers are going to expire_next.
hrtimer_reprogram()
if (expires.tv64 == expires_next->tv64)
if (timer != next_hrtimer)
timer->realtime++;
(lazily reusing realtime here, coz we know its always zero otherwise ;) )
Now timer->realtime is very much non-zero :)
So, now base->first has already changed (leftmost node in the rb tree) and is
pointing to this new timer node which is also going to expire_next, but hasn't
changed the value of expire_next (we just returned 0).
Therefore, in remove_hrtimer()
+ if (base->first == &timer->node) {
+ base->first = rb_next(&timer->node);
+ /* Reprogram the clock event device. if enabled */
+ if (reprogram && hrtimer_hres_active()) {
+ expires = ktime_sub(hrtimer_get_expires(timer),
+ base->offset);
timer->node is going to point to the latest timer enqueued which is going
to expire_next.
With your latest patch, we will force reprogram, but the next node to arm
the timer will be needless, because, its expiry is equal to expires_next.
So, by having a pointer like next_hrtimer, helps to represent all the timers
that are going to expire next, and thats why timer->cache_hits was always less
than timer->total_count.IOW, we avoided re-programming the device, if the
next timer was going to expire at the same time as the one we just removed.
Thoughts ?
Cheers,
Ashwin
--
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