[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878r8bphn6.ffs@tglx>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 00:15:09 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@...e.cz>,
Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...el.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 08/25] timer: Rework idle logic
On Wed, Oct 04 2023 at 14:34, Anna-Maria Behnsen wrote:
>
> - if (time_before_eq(nextevt, basej)) {
> - expires = basem;
> - base->is_idle = false;
> - } else {
> - if (base->timers_pending)
> - expires = basem + (u64)(nextevt - basej) * TICK_NSEC;
> - /*
> - * If we expect to sleep more than a tick, mark the base idle.
> - * Also the tick is stopped so any added timer must forward
> - * the base clk itself to keep granularity small. This idle
> - * logic is only maintained for the BASE_STD base, deferrable
> - * timers may still see large granularity skew (by design).
> - */
> - if ((expires - basem) > TICK_NSEC)
> - base->is_idle = true;
> + /*
> + * Base is idle if the next event is more than a tick away. Also
> + * the tick is stopped so any added timer must forward the base clk
> + * itself to keep granularity small. This idle logic is only
> + * maintained for the BASE_STD base, deferrable timers may still
> + * see large granularity skew (by design).
> + */
> + base->is_idle = time_after(nextevt, basej + 1);
This is wrongly ordered. base->is_idle must be updated _after_
evaluating base->timers_pending because the below can change nextevt,
no?
> + if (base->timers_pending) {
> + /* If we missed a tick already, force 0 delta */
> + if (time_before(nextevt, basej))
> + nextevt = basej;
> + expires = basem + (u64)(nextevt - basej) * TICK_NSEC;
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists