Re: [patch] del_timer_sync scalability patch
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Tue Mar 15 2005 - 03:10:08 EST
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > I suspect that del_timer_sync() in its current form is racy.
> > next timer interrupt, __run_timers() picks
> > this timer again, sets timer->base = NULL
> > if (timer_pending(timer)) // no, timer->base == NULL
> timer->base is != NULL because the timer has rescheduled itself.
> __mod_timer sets timer->bBase
Christoph, please look again. Yes, __mod_timer sets timer->base,
but it is cleared in the _next_ timer interrupt on CPU 0.
Andrew, Ingo, what do you think?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/