lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 09/22] pollfs: pollable hrtimers
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 02:22 -0300, Davi Arnaut wrote:
>> plain text document attachment (pollfs-timer.patch)
>> Per file descriptor high-resolution timers. A classic unix file interface for
>> the POSIX timer_(create|settime|gettime|delete) family of functions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Davi E. M. Arnaut <davi@haxent.com.br>
>
> Nacked-by-me.
>
> Aside of the fact, that it is a bad clone of the timerfd code, it is
> simply broken and untested.

I've made it by the same time of timerfd, I even sent it to Davide and
the list. "Clone" is a bit of overstatment, timerfd is not bugged as this :)

>> +
>> +struct hrtimerspec {
>> + int flags;
>> + clockid_t clock;
>> + struct itimerspec expr;
>> +};
>
> How exactly knows userspace what a struct hrtimerspec is ? Is the c file
> exported as a header ?

Will move then all to another header later.

>> +static ssize_t read(struct pfs_timer *evs, struct itimerspec __user *uspec)
>> +{
>> + int ret = -EAGAIN;
>> + ktime_t remaining = {};
>> + unsigned long overruns = 0;
>> + struct itimerspec spec = {};
>> + struct hrtimer *timer = &evs->timer;
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irq(&evs->lock);
>> +
>> + if (!evs->overruns)
>> + goto out_unlock;
>> +
>> + if (hrtimer_active(timer))
>> + remaining = hrtimer_get_remaining(timer);
>> + else if (evs->interval.tv64 > 0)
>> + overruns = hrtimer_forward(timer, hrtimer_cb_get_time(timer),
>> + evs->interval);
>
> Where is the logic here ?

Return the remaing time for timer firing, or rearm the timer. And its
pretty broken because of the first if and I forgot to reset overruns.

> If no overrun, return remaining time = 0
>
> If active, return the real remaining time. This path is never hit, as
> the timer is nowhere restarted.
>
> If not active, return remanining time = 0. How does the caller know how
> many events are missed ?
>
>> + ret = -EOVERFLOW;
>> + if (overruns > (ULONG_MAX - evs->overruns))
>> + goto out_unlock;
>> + else
>> + evs->overruns += overruns;
>
> Interesting feature. evs->overruns is adding up forever and then limited
> to ULONG_MAX

See third comment!

>> +static enum hrtimer_restart timer_fn(struct hrtimer *timer)
>> +{
>> + struct pfs_timer *evs = container_of(timer, struct pfs_timer, timer);
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&evs->lock, flags);
>> + /* timer tick, interval has elapsed */
>> + if (!evs->overruns++)
>> + wake_up_all(&evs->wait);
>
> Cool. Waiters, which came after the first event are stuck. Simply
> because there is no second event.

See third comment!

>> +static ssize_t write(struct pfs_timer *evs,
>> + const struct hrtimerspec __user *uspec)
>> +{
>> + struct hrtimerspec spec;
>
> See first comment !
>
>> + if (copy_from_user(&spec, uspec, sizeof(spec)))
>> + return -EFAULT;
>> +
>> + if (spec_invalid(&spec))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + rearm_timer(evs, &spec);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int poll(struct pfs_timer *evs)
>> +{
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + ret = evs->overruns ? POLLIN : 0;
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>
> Creative lockless programming style with 4 lines overhead and a
> guaranteed return POLLIN after the first timer event. This is really
> cute as it covers the missing timer restart and guarantees 100% CPU load
> for ever. Hmm, maybe it's correct: polling should loop for ever,
> shouldn't it ?

See third comment! -- It will remain lockless, as reading and setting
this data type is guaranteed to happen atomically.

>> +static const struct pfs_operations timer_ops = {
>> + .read = PFS_READ(read, struct pfs_timer, struct itimerspec),
>> + .write = PFS_WRITE(write, struct pfs_timer, struct hrtimerspec),
>> + .poll = PFS_POLL(poll, struct pfs_timer),
>> + .release = PFS_RELEASE(release, struct pfs_timer),
>> + .rsize = sizeof(struct itimerspec),
>> + .wsize = sizeof(struct hrtimerspec),
>
> See first comment !

This has nothing to do with user space, or you got lost in comments
references.

--
Davi Arnaut

-
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: 2007-05-03 01:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans