Re: Question about ktime_get_mono_fast_ns() non-monotonic behavior

[John Stultz]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 2:18 PM Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I have a question about ktime_get_mono_fast_ns(), which is used by the
> BPF helper bpf_ktime_get_ns() among other use cases. The comment above
> this function specifies that there are cases where the observed clock
> would not be monotonic.
>
> I had 2 beginner questions:

Thinking about this a bit more, I have my own "beginner question": Why
does bpf_ktime_get_ns() need to use the ktime_get_mono_fast_ns()
accessor instead of ktime_get_ns()?

I don't know enough about the contexts that bpf logic can run, so it's
not clear to me and it's not obviously commented either.

Looking at some of the uses of ktime_get_mono_fast_ns() spread around
the kernel, some are clearly necessary (trying to get timestamps in
suspend paths after timekeeping might be shutdown, etc). But there's
also a few cases where the need isn't clear and I'm worried the
reasoning is because it says "fast" in its name.
  "Why stop with ktime_get_mono_fast_ns() when you could instead use
ktime_get_real_fast()! It's *real fast*!" :)

thanks
-john