| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
switch itimers to a hrtimers-based implementation
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Fix the recent off-by-one fix in the itimer code:
1. The repeating timer is figured using the requested time
(not +1 as we know where we are in the jiffie).
2. The tests for interval too large are left to the time_val to jiffie code.
Signed-off-by: George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
As Steven Rostedt pointed out, there are 2 problems with ITIMER_REAL
timers.
1. do_setitimer() does not call del_timer_sync() in case
when the timer is not pending (it_real_value() returns 0).
This is wrong, the timer may still be running, and it can
rearm itself.
2. It calls del_timer_sync() with tsk->sighand->siglock held.
This is deadlockable, because timer's handler needs this
lock too.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
It seems that the code responsible for this is in kernel/itimer.c:126:
p->signal->real_timer.expires = jiffies + interval;
add_timer(&p->signal->real_timer);
If you request an interval of, lets say 900 usecs, the interval given by
timeval_to_jiffies will be 1.
If you request this when we are half-way between two timer ticks, the
interval will only give 400 usecs.
If we want to guarantee that we never ever give intervals less than
requested, the simple solution would be to change that to:
p->signal->real_timer.expires = jiffies + interval + 1;
This however will produce pathological cases, like having a idle system
being requested 1 ms timeouts will give systematically 2 ms timeouts,
whereas currently it simply gives a few usecs less than 1 ms.
The complex (and more computationally expensive) solution would be to
check the gettimeofday time, and compute the correct number of jiffies.
This way, if we request a 300 usecs timer 200 usecs inside the timer
tick, we can wait just one tick, but not if we are 800 usecs inside the
tick. This would also mean that we would have to lock preemption during
these computations to avoid races, etc.
I've searched the archives but couldn't find this particular issue being
discussed before.
Attached is a patch to do the simple solution, in case anybody thinks
that it should be used.
Signed-Off-By: Paulo Marques <pmarques@grupopie.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.
Let it rip!
|
