Re: slow nanosleep?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 2010/09/08 16:30:07:
>
> On Wed, 8 Sep 2010, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 2010/09/08 15:52:23:
> > > On Wed, 8 Sep 2010, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Actually, it takes 120 us. The 20 us was when I had Thomas
> > > > timeout == 0 fast path patch applied(forgot to remove it).
> > > > Without that patch it takes about 115 us. So it seems it takes
> > > > 115-20=95 us to turn the timer wheel on my ppc.
> > >
> > > You might fire up the tracer to look where it spends that time.
> >
> > This helps for short(1 ns) nanosleeps, sleeps for 25 us. No idea
> > if this is any good, just tossing it out for you to tear apart :)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/hrtimer.c b/kernel/hrtimer.c
> > index 5c69e99..e612016 100644
> > --- a/kernel/hrtimer.c
> > +++ b/kernel/hrtimer.c
> > @@ -1545,6 +1545,9 @@ long __sched hrtimer_nanosleep_restart(struct
> restart_block *restart)
> >              HRTIMER_MODE_ABS);
> >     hrtimer_set_expires_tv64(&t.timer, restart->nanosleep.expires);
> >
> > +   if (!hrtimer_active(&t.timer))
> > +      goto out;
>
> That actually will return for any expiry time. The timer is armed in
> do_nanosleep() not in hrtimer_set_expires_tv64() /
> hrtimer_set_expires_range_ns()

eehh, I should have tested with bigger nanosleeps as well :(

--
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/