Re: [PATCH] hrtimer, add expiry time overflow check in hrtimer_interrupt

From: John Stultz
Date: Wed Apr 24 2013 - 20:43:30 EST

On 04/24/2013 05:35 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 05:05:03PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
On 04/24/2013 03:42 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 04:34:26PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
On 04/08/2013 04:19 PM, John Stultz wrote:
On 04/08/2013 05:47 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
A simple check for an overflow can resolve this problem. Using KTIME_MAX
instead of the overflow value will result in the hrtimer function being run,
and the reprogramming of the timer after that.

Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Prarit: Should this be tagged for -stable?

Yes, this should go to -stable. cc'd.


I am a bit surprised that this patch has not found its way into mainline yet,
as everyone seems to agree that it is a candidate for -stable.
It just has to land upstream first, which is likely in the next week
or so when the 3.10 merge window opens. I'd have thought it would be
sooner but 3.9 is taking longer to close then I expected (and I
didn't think it was urgent enough to drop in at the last minute
before the 3.9 release was made).

Guess I am a bit lost in process.

If this is going to be in -stable, it will presumably end up in 3.9.x as well as
in earlier releases. So why wasn't it pushed into 3.9-rcX to start with ?

I usually only want to push changes to -rc6+ if they are really critical, affecting lots of folks and fixing issues introduced in the same cycle. By getting less critical fixes merged during a normal merge window, then backporting them to affected -stable trees, we get better test coverage and less chance for further bugs to be introduced at the last minute before the release is made.

Its maybe a bit overly conservative, but I'm less and less into late-night heroics these days. ;)


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at