[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181205222523.GA14609@localhost>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 14:25:24 -0800
From: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:core/rcu] rcutorture: Make initrd/init execute in userspace
On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 03:04:23PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 02:24:13PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 02:09:42PM -0800, tip-bot for Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh
> > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh
> > > @@ -39,9 +39,22 @@ mkdir $T
> > >
> > > cat > $T/init << '__EOF___'
> > > #!/bin/sh
> > > +# Run in userspace a few milliseconds every second. This helps to
> > > +# exercise the NO_HZ_FULL portions of RCU.
> > > while :
> > > do
> > > - sleep 1000000
> > > + q=
> > > + for i in \
> > > + a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a \
> > > + a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a \
> > > + a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a \
> > > + a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a \
> > > + a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a \
> > > + a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
> >
> > Ow. If there's no better way to do this, please do at least comment how many 'a's
> > this is. (And why 186, exactly?)
>
> Yeah, that is admittedly a bit strange. The reason for 186 occurrences of
> "a" to one-time calibration, measuring a few millisecond's worth of delay.
>
> > Please also consider calibrating the delay loop as you do in the C code.
>
> Good point. And a quick web search finds me "date '+%s%N'", which gives
> me nanoseconds since the epoch. I probably don't want to do a 2038 to
> myself (after all, I might still be alive then), so I should probably try
> to make something work with "date '+%N'". Or use something like this:
>
> $ date '+%4N'; date '+%4N';date '+%4N'; date '+%4N'
> 6660
> 6685
> 6697
> 6710
>
> Ah, but that means I need to add the "date" command to my initrd, doesn't
> it? And calculation requires either bash or the "test" command. And it
> would be quite good to restrict this to what can be done with Bourne shell
> built-in commands, since a big point of this is to maintain a small-sized
> initrd. :-/
Sure, and I'm not suggesting adding commands to the initrd, hence my
mention of "If there's no better way".
> So how about the following patch, which attempts to explain the situation?
That would help, but please also consider consolidating with something
like a10="a a a a a a a a a a" to make it more readable (and perhaps
rounding up to 200 for simplicity).
- Josh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists