lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 14/16] timer: Implement the hierarchical pull model
    On Tue, 15 Nov 2022, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

    > On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 03:57:35PM +0100, Anna-Maria Behnsen wrote:
    > > +static int tmigr_cpu_offline(unsigned int cpu)
    > > +{
    > > + struct tmigr_cpu *tmc = this_cpu_ptr(&tmigr_cpu);
    > > +
    > > + raw_spin_lock_irq(&tmc->lock);
    > > + tmc->online = 0;
    > > + __tmigr_cpu_deactivate(tmc, KTIME_MAX);
    >
    > This means that if the CPU is going idle for some time during
    > the hotplug process (ie: at some point between CPUHP_AP_TMIGR_ONLINE
    > and CPUHP_TEARDOWN_CPU), then a global timer may be delayed for that long.
    >
    > I guess it shouldn't be too bad but worth mentioning...
    >
    > Although if it happens to be a problem it could be solved with simply allowing
    > tmigr_cpu_deactivate() when !tmc->online.

    The plan was (and I broke it) to let the CPU handle global timers by itself
    as long as timer migration hierarchy is not completely initialized and as
    long as CPU is marked offline in timer migration hierarchy. Otherwise
    global timers might be delayed during this period. The proper way would be
    that tmigr_cpu_deactivate(nextexp) directly returns nextexp if !tmc->online
    and tmigr hierarchy is not in place yet. I will have a deeper look if there
    was a reason why I changed the return to KTIME_MAX...

    Thanks,

    Anna-Maria

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2022-11-24 08:49    [W:2.183 / U:0.136 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site