timers: simplify locking
PATCH 1/1 timers: simplify locking
This is the last one, I promise.
On top of "[PATCH rc1-mm3] timers: kill timer_list->lock", see
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=111193319932543
This patch adds lock_timer() helper, which locks timer's base, and checks it is still the same and != NULL.
After the previous patch the timer's base is never NULL. With this patch __mod_timer() temporaly sets ->_base = __TIMER_PENDING after deletion of timer, so the timer is still pending and can't be locked by lock_timer().
The result is that __mod_timer() does not need to lock both bases. Now it can do:
old_base = lock_timer() list_del(timer) __set_base(timer, NULL, 1) unlock(old_base) // The timer can't be seen by __run_timers(old_base). // Still pending, del_timer() will call lock_timer(). // Nobody can modify it, lock_timer() will wait. lock_new(new_base) add timer unlock(new_base)
This slightly speedups __mod_timer(), and in my opinion simplifies the code. I hope it may also improve scalability of timers.
include/linux/timer.h renamed from include/linux/timer.h~ +1 -6
@@ -33,11 +33,6 @@ struct timer_list {#define __TIMER_PENDING 1 -static inline int __timer_pending (struct tvec_t_base_s *base) -{ -return ((unsigned long )base & __TIMER_PENDING) !=0 ; -} -#define TIMER_MAGIC 0x4b87ad6eextern struct fake_timer_base fake_timer_base;
@@ -64,7 +59,7 @@ void fastcall init_timer(struct timer_li*/ static inline int timer_pending (const struct timer_list * timer) { -return __timer_pending (timer->_base); +return ((unsigned long )timer->_base & __TIMER_PENDING) !=0 ; }extern void add_timer_on (struct timer_list *timer,int cpu);
kernel/timer.c renamed from kernel/timer.c~ +45 -56
156 lines not on this page · raw message
Ok. Testing with your latest and greatest patches. Is there any clarity about what caused the hangs?
Quoted 2 lines · Christoph Lameter
Ok. Testing with your latest and greatest patches.
Many thanks.
Quoted 1 line
Is there any clarity about what caused the hangs?
No, I still hope these hangs are unrelated to these patches. I am trying to find the bug, but I can't. May be it is because I do not want to believe that these patches are buggy :)
I tried to stress them with various small tests I wrote and I have not found any problems.
And I don't know what kernel you are using, there is additional timer patch in mm2.
Oleg.
Quoted 4 lines · Oleg Nesterov
This is the last one, I promise.
On top of "[PATCH rc1-mm3] timers: killtimer_list->lock", see
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=111193319932543
I thought that earlier patch was a bit weird and I think it would be better to get to the bottom of these problems which people have been reporting in the 2.6.12-rc1-mm3 timer code before adding more things, don't you?
Quoted 8 lines · Andrew Morton
Quoted 4 lines · Oleg Nesterov
This is the last one, I promise.
On top of "[PATCH rc1-mm3] timers: killtimer_list->lock", see
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=111193319932543I thought that earlier patch was a bit weird
A bit weird, or too weird to be acceptable?
I am very much interested in your and others opinion. You do not like this fake_timer_base or you don't like the idea that the timer is always locked through timer_base() ?
These 2 patches should be cleanuped of course.
struct XXX {
spinlock_t lock;
timer_list *running_timer;
};struct XXX fake_timer_base;
struct tvec_t_base_s {
struct XXX xxx;
long timer_jiffies;
tvec_t tv1;
...
}struct timer_list {
...
struct XXX *_base;
}So tvec_t_base_s is used only in __mod_timer() for new_base. This cleanup would be trivial and without changes in timer.o.
However this global fake_timer_base is really neccessary for this patch and it is really wierd.
But I like the fact that __mod_timer() takes 2 locks sequentially instead of 3 at once.
Quoted 3 lines
and I think it would be better
to get to the bottom of these problems which people have been reporting in the 2.6.12-rc1-mm3 timer code before adding more things, don't you?
I just can't imagine how this "del_timer_sync instead of del_singleshot_timer in schedule_timeout" can reveal any bug in these patches. del_singleshot_timer calls del_timer_sync anyway when the timer is inactive. The only difference is that now schedule_timeout()->del_timer_sync() actually deletes this timer when the caller was waken by a signal/event. And that deletion is very simple, it just "can't be wrong", and it adds LIST_POISON to timer->entry.
But you are right of course. It is better to forget about these new patches for a while.
Oleg.