Re: [Bug #12667] Badness at kernel/time/timekeeping.c:98 in pmud(timekeeping_suspended)

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Fri, 20 Feb 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 21:17 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > 
> > Well, harsh or not is not the question here. 
> > 
> > Fact is that you call gettimeofday() _before_ the timekeeping code has
> > resumed.
> > 
> > That's a simple ordering problem. timekeeping is in the sysdev class
> > as well and it's not the only sysdev which has explicit ordering
> > requirements.
> 
> And how do I control that ordering ?
> 
> I find that a bit fishy ... What about making gettimeofday() in the
> timekeeping code work, just return a frozen snapshot of the value on
> suspend instead ?

We had problems in the past where we just returned frozen time and the
calling code got surprised when the time jumped 5 hours ahead just a
few microseconds later.

What I find more fishy is the fact that the lid switch needs to be a
sysdev. It's a simple input event, which causes the user space code to
trigger the suspend sequence when the lid is shut.

Thanks,

	tglx

--
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/