linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] epoll: add nsec timeout support with epoll

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: <CAF=yD-+D8E9ksXrWe8ezd-B9pdu7PhMwGjG4gCBvuABRahrsAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:37:02 -0500
From:   Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Linux FS-devel Mailing List <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil.kdev@...il.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Shuo Chen <shuochen@...gle.com>,
        linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] epoll: add nsec timeout support with epoll_pwait2

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 9:31 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 09:19:35AM -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > But for epoll, this is inefficient: in ep_set_mstimeout it calls
> > ktime_get_ts64 to convert timeout to an offset from current time, only
> > to pass it to select_estimate_accuracy to then perform another
> > ktime_get_ts64 and subtract this to get back to (approx.) the original
> > timeout.
> >
> > How about a separate patch that adds epoll_estimate_accuracy with
> > the same rules (wrt rt_task, current->timer_slack, nice and upper bound)
> > but taking an s64 timeout.
> >
> > One variation, since it is approximate, I suppose we could even replace
> > division by a right shift?
> >
> > After that, using s64 everywhere is indeed much simpler. And with that
> > I will revise the new epoll_pwait2 interface to take a long long
> > instead of struct timespec.
>
> I think the userspace interface should take a struct timespec
> for consistency with ppoll and pselect. And epoll should use
> poll_select_set_timeout() to convert the relative timeout to an absolute
> endtime.  Make epoll more consistent with select/poll, not less ...

Okay. The absolute time is also needed for schedule_hrtimeout_range,
so it could not be entirely avoided, anyway.