From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751928Ab3GSUd0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:33:26 -0400 Received: from relay1.sgi.com ([192.48.179.29]:44547 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750902Ab3GSUdZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:33:25 -0400 Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:33:24 -0500 From: Nathan Zimmer To: Holger Hans Peter Freyther Cc: Nathan Zimmer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: /proc/timer_list and weird behavior with dropbear Message-ID: <20130719203323.GA129438@asylum.americas.sgi.com> References: <20130719152800.GA20792@xiaoyu.lan> <51E95F0B.6080703@sgi.com> <20130719170354.GE5902@xiaoyu.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130719170354.GE5902@xiaoyu.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 07:03:54PM +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:45:15AM -0500, Nathan Zimmer wrote: > > > I hadn't noticed anything. > > Let me try your program and see what I may have missed. > > Hi, > > I neither know the semantics of the timer_list nor how to use > seq_file correctly. What happens is that timer_list_next will only > be called once. This means that iter->cpu will never be increased. > > This just moves to the next CPU when stop is called (e.g. nothing > was added once the print_tickdevice was printed). Do you think > this could be correct? > > > > diff --git a/kernel/time/timer_list.c b/kernel/time/timer_list.c > index 3bdf283..8d36a3d 100644 > --- a/kernel/time/timer_list.c > +++ b/kernel/time/timer_list.c > @@ -327,8 +327,10 @@ static void *timer_list_next(struct seq_file *file, void *v, loff_t *offset) > return timer_list_start(file, offset); > } > > -static void timer_list_stop(struct seq_file *seq, void *v) > +static void timer_list_stop(struct seq_file *file, void *v) > { > + struct timer_list_iter *iter = file->private; > + iter->cpu = cpumask_next(iter->cpu, cpu_online_mask); > } > > static const struct seq_operations timer_list_sops = { I think this would be an acceptable fix. It work file locally. Could you check it out to see if it behaves? Nate