Re: [RFC/RFT patch 0/7] timekeeping: Unify clock MONOTONIC and clock BOOTTIME

[Pavel Machek]

On Tue 2018-04-24 10:09:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, John Stultz wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 7:45 PM, Genki Sky <sky@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Quoting Genki Sky (2018/04/23 20:40:36 -0400)
> > >> I came across this thread for same reason as [0]: Daemons getting
> > >> killed by systemd on resume (after >WatchdogSec seconds of
> > >> suspending). I'm using master branch of systemd and the kernel. As
> > >> mentioned, systemd uses CLOCK_MONOTONIC, originally expecting it to
> > >> not include suspend time.
> > >>
> > >> Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I don't see the ambiguity of whether
> > >> this patch series breaks systemd. If it's implemented correctly, you'd
> > >> hope it *would* break it!
> > >
> > > This sounded a little weak on re-reading, sorry. So, I just confirmed
> > > that after booting a "git revert -m 1 680014d6d1da", the issue no
> > > longer appears. (I.e., a suspend for >WatchDog sec doesn't result in
> > > any daemon getting killed).
> > >
> > > Let me know if I can help in any way.
> > 
> > Yea, this is the sort of thing I was worried about.
> > 
> > Thomas: I think reverting this change is needed.
> 
> Sigh. I hoped that something like this would be catched before I sent the
> pull request by those who were actually interested in this change...

Well, we had two regressions in -next this cycle... I reported both
but bisections were not easy and noone was really interested.

See

Re: linux-next on x60: network manager often complains "network is
        disabled" after resume

Subject: Re: CLOCK_MONOTONIC, BOOTTIME, suspend and screensaver
regression

Can we expect this to be sorted out in v4.17-rc3? -next?
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature