Re: [GIT PULL] timer fix

From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] timer fix
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 16:58:59 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190117155859.GE18351@osiris> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190117095102.GA88466@gmail.com>

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 10:51:02AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > > -	if (timr->it_requeue_pending == info->si_sys_private) {
> > > +	if (timr->it_interval && timr->it_requeue_pending == info->si_sys_private) {
> > >  		timr->kclock->timer_rearm(timr);
> > 
> > FWIW, with this patch the vanilla glibc 2.28 self tests
> > rt/tst-cputimer1, rt/tst-cputimer2, and rt/tst-cputimer3
> > start to fail on s390:
...
> > I haven't looked any further into this, just reporting.. otherwise the
> > test systems seem to be healthy.
> 
> Could you please check whether the top commit in tip:timers/urgent fixes 
> it:
>   93ad0fc088c5: posix-cpu-timers: Unbreak timer rearming

Yes, the test cases don't fail anymore. Thanks!

A general question: since I reported this already last year, was the
bug report not usable? I understand that x-mas holidays were in
between, just wondering if new "glibc test case" fails are worth to be
reported like I did.