[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTim9HhzE3wL+C3JVbU38sfrJrYMc0o2TMae_8ciK@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:53:08 -0700
From: Scott James Remnant <scott@...split.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <virtuoso@...nd.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ken MacLeod <ken@...sko.slc.ut.us>,
Shaun Reich <predator106@...il.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...band.com>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFCv4] timerfd: add TFD_NOTIFY_CLOCK_SET to watch for clock changes
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2011, Scott James Remnant wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Andrew Morton
>> <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:01:09 -0800 Scott James Remnant <scott@...split.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> > It would be helpful to know if the identified users of this feature
>> >> > actually find it useful and adequate. __I guess the most common
>> >> > application is the 1,001 desktop clock widgets. __Do you have any
>> >> > feedback from any of the owners of those?
>> >> >
>> >> cron is another obvious one (or init systems attempting to replace
>> >> cron). Having to wakeup and check the time every minute can be
>> >> non-conducive to power savings, it would be better if we could just
>> >> sleep until the next alarm and be woken up if the time changes in
>> >> between.
>> >>
>> >> (That being said, we also need to poll for and/or check for timezone
>> >> changes - but those are entirely userspace, so we can deal with that
>> >> separately)
>> >
>> > Sure, there will be lots of applications.
>> >
>> > But what I'm asking isn't "it is a good feature". I'm asking "is the
>> > feature implemented well". Ideally someone would get down and modify
>> > cron to use the interface in this patch.
>> >
>> So I've just been thinking today - and I'm actually not sure whether
>> this is needed at all for this case.
>>
>> A good cron implementation is going to set timers according to
>> CLOCK_REALTIME; in the case where the clock changes forwards, those
>> timers will fire as part of the clock changing already no? And in the
>> case where the clock changes backwards, you don't want to re-run old
>> ones anyway.
>>
>> Even the hourly/daily cases are actually at a fixed time, so would be
>> triggered - and a decent implementation wouldn't trigger a given
>> script more than once.
>
> Yeah, I was wondering about today as well. Though when you set back
> your clock several days, stuff might be surprised if it's not woken up
> for several days :)
>
I've checked the code, and more importantly, tested the
setting-forward example - timers do indeed fire at the point the clock
is wound forwards. This means there doesn't appear to be a utility for
this patch in the cron case.
In the wound back case, I believe that even current cron goes to some
effort to avoid firing events that have already happened?
Scott
--
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