lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RT PATCH 1/2] timers: wakeup all timer waiters
On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:05:03 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:

> The base lock is dropped during the invocation if the timer. That means
> it is possible that we have one waiter while timer1 is running and once
> this one finished, we get another waiter while timer2 is running. Since
> we wake up only one waiter it is possible that we miss the other one.
> This will probably heal itself over time because most of the time we
> complete timers without an active wake up.
> To avoid the scenario where we don't wake up all waiters at once,
> wake_up_all() is used.
>
> Cc: stable-rt@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> ---
> kernel/time/timer.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/time/timer.c b/kernel/time/timer.c
> index 5f9d3599ef0a..b3c3d3a6216f 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/timer.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/timer.c
> @@ -1051,7 +1051,7 @@ static void wait_for_running_timer(struct timer_list *timer)
> base->running_timer != timer);
> }
>
> -# define wakeup_timer_waiters(b) wake_up(&(b)->wait_for_running_timer)
> +# define wakeup_timer_waiters(b) wake_up_all(&(b)->wait_for_running_timer)

OK, I just received this patch (way after patch 2)

I'm assuming that patch two was done such that you don't do a
"wake_up_all" under a spinlock.

-- Steve

> #else
> static inline void wait_for_running_timer(struct timer_list *timer)
> {

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-07-14 19:01    [W:0.048 / U:27.848 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site