[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] timers: Fix usleep_range() in the context of wake_up_process()
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 01:12:39PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Brian Norris <> wrote:
> > I believe 'min' is unmodified throughout, and therefore 'kmin' is
> > computed to be the same minimum timeout in each loop. Shouldn't this be
> > decreasing on each iteration of the loop? (i.e., either your compute
> > 'kmin' differently here, or you recompute 'min' based on the elapsed
> > time?)
> Yes, I stupidly changed something at the last second and then didn't
> test again after my stupid change. Fix coming soon with all comments
> addressed. Sorry for posting broken code. :( :( :(

With a loop style that is actively re-calculating things,
such implementations should then not fall into the trap of
basing the "next" value on "current" time,
thereby bogusly accumulating scheduling-based delays
with each new loop iteration etc.
(i.e., things should still be based on hard, precise termination according to
an *initially* calculated, *absolute*, *minimum* expiry time).

Andreas Mohr

GNU/Linux. It's not the software that's free, it's you.

 \ /
  Last update: 2016-10-10 22:42    [W:0.050 / U:0.296 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site