[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87wmewb0p8.ffs@tglx>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:39:47 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Imran Khan <imran.f.khan@...cle.com>, anna-maria@...utronix.de,
frederic@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] timers: WARN if add_timer_on is used with offlined
cpu.
On Thu, Jan 16 2025 at 00:41, Imran Khan wrote:
> timer started on an offlined cpu will not fire after
> its expiry time and may never fire if that cpu remains
> offline.
> So add a WARN_ON_ONCE in add_timer_on, to indicate
> if any of its users are (wrongly) starting a timer
> on an offlined cpu.
>
> Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Imran Khan <imran.f.khan@...cle.com>
> ---
> kernel/time/timer.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/time/timer.c b/kernel/time/timer.c
> index a5860bf6d16f9..ec9eb58e45241 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/timer.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/timer.c
> @@ -1370,6 +1370,12 @@ void add_timer_on(struct timer_list *timer, int cpu)
> if (!timer->function)
> goto out_unlock;
>
> + /*
> + * WARN if specified cpu is offline, because on offlined cpu
> + * timer will not fire even after its expiry.
> + */
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpu_online(cpu));
Then why queueing the timer in the first place?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists