[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171225162418.GA25931@lerouge>
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2017 17:24:21 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
rt@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] timer: Use deferrable base independent of
base::nohz_active
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 03:51:12PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
>
> During boot and before base::nohz_active is set in the timer bases, deferrable
> timers are enqueued into the standard timer base. This works correctly as
> long as base::nohz_active is false.
>
> Once it base::nohz_active is set and a timer which was enqueued before that
> is accessed the lock selector code choses the lock of the deferred
> base. This causes unlocked access to the standard base and in case the
> timer is removed it does not clear the pending flag in the standard base
> bitmap which causes get_next_timer_interrupt() to return bogus values.
>
> To prevent that, the deferrable timers must be enqueued in the deferrable
> base, even when base::nohz_active is not set. Those deferrable timers also
> need to be expired unconditional.
>
> Fixes: 500462a9de65 ("timers: Switch to a non-cascading wheel")
> Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: rt@...utronix.de
Nice catch!
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists