lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH][RFC v4] timekeeping: ignore the bogus sleep time if pm_trace is enabled
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 03:08:56PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> On 2016/08/18 at 18:43, Chen Yu wrote:
> > Previously we encountered some memory overflow issues due to
> > the bogus sleep time brought by inconsistent rtc, which is
> > triggered when pm_trace is enabled, please refer to:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9286365/
> > It's improper in the first place to call __timekeeping_inject_sleeptime()
> > in case that pm_trace is enabled simply because that "hash" time value
> > will wreckage the timekeeping subsystem.
> >
> > So this patch ignores the sleep time if pm_trace is enabled in
> > the following situation:
> > 1. rtc is used as persist clock to compensate for sleep time,
> > (because system does not have a nonstop clocksource) or
> > 2. rtc is used to calculate the sleep time in rtc_resume.
> >
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
> > Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > Cc: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
> > Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > Reported-by: Janek Kozicki <cosurgi@gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
> > ---
> I suddenly think of a way to avoid adding this ugly __weak auxiliary function.
>
> Add a special treatment for read_persistent_clock() in arch/x86/kernel/rtc.c as follows,
> void read_persistent_clock(struct timespec *ts)
> {
> x86_platform.get_wallclock(ts);
>
> /* Make rtc-based persistent clock unusable if pm_trace is enabled. */
> if (pm_trace_is_enabled() &&
> x86_platform.get_wallclock == mach_get_cmos_time) {
> ts->tv_sec = 0;
> ts->tv_nsec = 0;
>
> In this way, we can avoid the touch of timekeeping core, after all ptrace is currently x86-specific.
>
> What do you think?
>
OK, I have another question, if we do like this, as read_persistent_clock64
is invoked in timekeeping_suspend/timekeeping_resume/timekeeping_init,
then for timekeeping_init case, if pm_trace is enabled by command line,
we will never use rtc even if we do not suspend?




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-17 09:58    [W:0.082 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site