Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 13 Jul 2012 00:43:34 +0200 | From | Jiri Bohac <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/6] Fix for leapsecond caused hrtimer/futex issue (updated) |
| |
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 03:53:59PM -0700, John Stultz wrote: > On 07/10/2012 03:43 PM, John Stultz wrote: > >Over the weekend, Thomas got a chance to review the leap second fix > >in more detail and had a few additional changes he wanted to make > >to improve performance as well as style. > > > >So this iteration includes his modifications. > > > >Once merged, I'll be working to get the backports finished as quickly > >as I can and sent to -stable.
looking at the proposed 2.6.32.y stable patch at: http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/jstultz/linux.git;a=commitdiff;h=18d208632bf17aed56c581b882868b2be44be71e;hp=6d224606bb8eec78027522d6dd5abfea8108c41a Is this the final version you are about to send to -stable?
In 2.6.32 timekeeping_leap_insert() is not called from the timer interrupt, but from the leap_timer hrtimer.
I think the new clock_was_set_timer will thus not be called by irq_exit() because TIMER_SOFTIRQ has not been raised. Unless TIMER_SOFTIRQ is raised, clock_was_set() will not be called until the next periodic timer interrupt, correct?
Wouldn't the original schedule_work() approach work better for 2.6.32?
Or do you plan backporting the most recent version to 2.6.32?
Thanks,
-- Jiri Bohac <jbohac@suse.cz> SUSE Labs, SUSE CZ
| |