lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Q] jiffies overflow & timers.
Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>>Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>>
>>>Use jiffies as other modules use it:
>>>
>>> tim = jiffies + TIMEOUT_IN_HZ;
>>> while(time_before(jiffies, tim))
>>> {
>>> if(what_im_waiting_for())
>>> break;
>>> current->policy |= SCHED_YIELD;
>>> schedule();
>>> }
>>>//
>>>// Note that somebody could have taken the CPU for many seconds
>>>// causing a 'timeout', therefore, you need to add one more check
>>>// after loop-termination:
>>>//
>>> if(what_im_waiting_for())
>>> good();
>>> else
>>> timed_out();
>>>
>>>Overflow is handled up to one complete wrap of jiffies + TIMEOUT. It's
>>>only the second wrap that will fail and if you are waiting several
>>>months for something to happen in your code, the code is broken.
>>>


time_before(a,b) == (((long)a - (long)b) < 0)

Can you explain me this games with signs there?
Or this code expected to work reliably for timeouts < (ULONG_MAX/2)?
time_before/time_after - do implicit conversion to signed types,
while jiffies/friends are all unsigned. If one day gcc will be fixed -
and it will truncate data here as I expect it to do - this will not work
at all. Or this is a feature of 2-complement archs?
(ldd2 again is silent on this topic - and I'm totally confused...)


>
> schedule() is the kernel procedure that gives the CPU to somebody
> while your code is waiting for something to happen. You cannot
> call that in an interrupt or when a lock is held.
>

It is state machine, it is event driven - there is nothing that can
yield CPU to someone else, because in first place it does not take CPU ;-)))
Right now it is run from tasklet - so ksoftirqd context.

Ok.
Thinking about this gave me hints to understand userspace
implementation of timers, which was used with my network layers before I
have started kernel port.
Idea is simple: all times absolute (think struct timeval). all given
timer events are put into let us say binary heap, with timeval used as
key. Check for expiration == O(1) - and this check is called in
"while(1) { schedule(); }" loop. If we have NO expired timer - we are
fast to yield CPU to someone else. Slow case of dequeueing from heap
(what is O(log(n))) is really slow by definition - we are dequeueing
event from heap and it needs to be processed.
Looks Ok to me.
Clearer/cleaner/safer than games with sign & ./kernel/timer.c
implementation (internal_add_timer/cascade_timers/run_timer_list - what
all those mess is about?).

--
Ihar 'Philips' Filipau / with best regards from Saarbruecken.
-- _ _ _
"... and for $64000 question, could you get yourself |_|*|_|
vaguely familiar with the notion of on-topic posting?" |_|_|*|
-- Al Viro @ LKML |*|*|*|
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans