linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/1] hrtimers: Cache next hrtimer

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4A9C9163.50907@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:13:39 -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:

>> This looks very good ! Our results are almost similar now. However, I think
>> that with this new
>> patch we're still arming the timer needlessly at least once. This is the
>> case when we're trying to remove the first (oldest) hrtimer with
>> timer->expires = cpu->expires_next, but we forgo the reprogramming, when we
>> really shouldn't. At this point, with the current scheme of things, we will
>> needlessly wakeup and simply correct the expires_next value by
>> traversing up the rbtree, to the parent node.
>>     
>
> That only happens, when that timer is the last one in both trees. Then
> the resulting reprogramming value is KTIME_MAX and we skip the
> reprogramming. That's easy to fix by removing the KTIME_MAX check.
>  
>   
Hmm. Agreed. I'll fix this and send a patch in the next few days. Otherwise, I think all else looks good.


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/