linux-kernel - Re: [patch V2 05/10] timer: Retrieve next expiry of pinned/non-pinned timers seperately

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 19 Apr 2017 09:05:58 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Richard Cochran <rcochran@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 05/10] timer: Retrieve next expiry of
 pinned/non-pinned timers seperately

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 01:11:07PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> --- a/kernel/time/timer.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/timer.c
> @@ -1472,23 +1472,27 @@ static u64 cmp_next_hrtimer_event(u64 ba
>   * get_next_timer_interrupt - return the time (clock mono) of the next timer
>   * @basej:	base time jiffies
>   * @basem:	base time clock monotonic
> + * @global_evt:	Pointer to store the expiry time of the next global timer
>   *
>   * Returns the tick aligned clock monotonic time of the next pending
>   * timer or KTIME_MAX if no timer is pending.
>   */
> -u64 get_next_timer_interrupt(unsigned long basej, u64 basem)
> +u64 get_next_timer_interrupt(unsigned long basej, u64 basem, u64 *global_evt)

Another tortured function signature. It seems entirely possible
@global_evt will be the next.


> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If the local queue expires first, there is no requirement for
> +	 * queuing the CPU in the global expiry mechanism.

The comment doesn't make sense... (maybe at this stage)

> +	 */
> +	if (!local_first && !global_empty)
> +		*global_evt = basem + (nextevt_global - basej) * TICK_NSEC;

I was initially thinking !local_first would have to imply !global_empty,
but after going back and reading the previous patches again, I found
this was not so. Still slightly surprising.

> +
> +	return cmp_next_hrtimer_event(basem, local_evt);
>  }
>  
>  /**
> 
>