Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] time: alarmtimer: Use TASK_FREEZABLE to cleanup freezer handling
From: Thomas Gleixner
Date: Mon Feb 20 2023 - 19:12:58 EST
Michael!
On Mon, Feb 20 2023 at 22:32, Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 10:18 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> * alarmtimer_fired - Handles alarm hrtimer being fired.
>> @@ -194,6 +196,8 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart alarmtimer_f
>> int ret = HRTIMER_NORESTART;
>> int restart = ALARMTIMER_NORESTART;
>>
>> + atomic_inc(&alarmtimer_wakeup);
>> +
>
> ptr->it_active = 0;
> if (ptr->it_interval) {
> atomic_inc(&alarmtimer_wakeup);
> si_private = ++ptr->it_requeue_pending;
> }
>
> Should I not go to the alarm_handle_timer? and only if it's a periodic
> one?
Why?
Any alarmtimer which hits that window has exactly the same problem.
It's not restricted to periodic timers. Why would a dropped one-shot
wakeup be acceptable?
It's neither restricted to posix timers. If a clock_nanosleep(ALARM)
expires in that window then the task wake up will just end up in the
/dev/null bucket for the very same reason. Why would this be correct?
Hmm?
<GRMBL>
> Michael
>
>> spin_lock_irqsave(&base->lock, flags);
<SNIP>Tons of wasted electrons</SNIP>
Can you please trim your replies?
</GRMBL>
Thanks,
tglx