* [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() @ 2011-05-21 10:58 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2011-05-24 7:54 ` Yong Zhang 2011-06-03 13:06 ` [tip:timers/urgent] timers: Consider " tip-bot for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2011-05-21 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: linux-kernel There is an optimization which does not update the timer if the timer was pending and the expiration time was unchanged. Since commit 3bbb9ec9 ("timers: Introduce the concept of timer slack for legacy timers") this optimization is no longer applied for timers where the expiration time got extended due to the slack value. So here it adds the check again after the expiration time might have been updated. Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> --- kernel/timer.c | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c index fd61986..bf09726 100644 --- a/kernel/timer.c +++ b/kernel/timer.c @@ -804,6 +804,8 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) return 1; expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); + if (timer_pending(timer) && timer->expires == expires) + return 1; return __mod_timer(timer, expires, false, TIMER_NOT_PINNED); } -- 1.7.4.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() 2011-05-21 10:58 [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2011-05-24 7:54 ` Yong Zhang 2011-05-24 12:13 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2011-06-03 13:06 ` [tip:timers/urgent] timers: Consider " tip-bot for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Yong Zhang @ 2011-05-24 7:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior; +Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-kernel On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 6:58 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> wrote: > There is an optimization which does not update the timer if the timer > was pending and the expiration time was unchanged. > Since commit 3bbb9ec9 ("timers: Introduce the concept of timer slack for > legacy timers") this optimization is no longer applied for timers where > the expiration time got extended due to the slack value. So here it adds > the check again after the expiration time might have been updated. > > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> > --- > kernel/timer.c | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c > index fd61986..bf09726 100644 > --- a/kernel/timer.c > +++ b/kernel/timer.c > @@ -804,6 +804,8 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > return 1; > > expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); So, why not move above line up, then we can use the recalculated expires? Thanks, Yong > + if (timer_pending(timer) && timer->expires == expires) > + return 1; > > return __mod_timer(timer, expires, false, TIMER_NOT_PINNED); > } > -- > 1.7.4.4 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > -- Only stand for myself ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() 2011-05-24 7:54 ` Yong Zhang @ 2011-05-24 12:13 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2011-05-25 8:35 ` Yong Zhang 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2011-05-24 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yong Zhang; +Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-kernel * Yong Zhang | 2011-05-24 15:54:17 [+0800]: >> diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c >> index fd61986..bf09726 100644 >> --- a/kernel/timer.c >> +++ b/kernel/timer.c >> @@ -804,6 +804,8 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) >> ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??return 1; >> >> ?? ?? ?? ??expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); > >So, why not move above line up, then we can use the recalculated >expires? We leave often before apply_slack() kicks in. From printks() it looks like we leave more often in first "return 1" than in the second. Moving that line up would lead to more __mode_timer() calls. > >Thanks, >Yong Sebastian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() 2011-05-24 12:13 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2011-05-25 8:35 ` Yong Zhang 2011-05-25 10:17 ` Thomas Gleixner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Yong Zhang @ 2011-05-25 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior; +Cc: Thomas Gleixner, linux-kernel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 994 bytes --] On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> wrote: > * Yong Zhang | 2011-05-24 15:54:17 [+0800]: > >>> diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c >>> index fd61986..bf09726 100644 >>> --- a/kernel/timer.c >>> +++ b/kernel/timer.c >>> @@ -804,6 +804,8 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) >>> ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??return 1; >>> >>> ?? ?? ?? ??expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); >> >>So, why not move above line up, then we can use the recalculated >>expires? > > We leave often before apply_slack() kicks in. From printks() it looks > like we leave more often in first "return 1" than in the second. Moving > that line up would lead to more __mode_timer() calls. Hmmm, so the reason is for a timer whose timer->slack is not set explicitly. when we recalculate expires, we will get different value sometimes. Could you please try the attached patch(webmail will mangle it) Thanks, Yong -- Only stand for myself [-- Attachment #2: 0001-timer-avoid-recount-slack-for-same-expire-pending-ti.patch --] [-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1936 bytes --] From 02fd23b0baf6f683e898927ed014cf7d0e8d5a90 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 16:20:17 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] timer: avoid recount slack for same-expire pending timer mod_timer has a optimized way for same-expire pending timer, but after we introduced slack, timer->expires will be recount based on timer->slack. So the current 'if (timer_pending(timer) && timer->expires == expires)' will be true only when 'timer->slack >= 0', but for the case where timer->slack is not defined explicitly, that check will fail sometimes. Reported-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> Signed-off-by: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> --- kernel/timer.c | 8 ++++++-- 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c index fd61986..73af53c 100644 --- a/kernel/timer.c +++ b/kernel/timer.c @@ -749,6 +749,10 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) unsigned long expires_limit, mask; int bit; + /* no need to account slack again for a same-expire pending timer */ + if (timer_pending(timer) && time_after_eq(timer->expires, expires)) + return timer->expires; + expires_limit = expires; if (timer->slack >= 0) { @@ -795,6 +799,8 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) */ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) { + expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); + /* * This is a common optimization triggered by the * networking code - if the timer is re-modified @@ -803,8 +809,6 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) if (timer_pending(timer) && timer->expires == expires) return 1; - expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); - return __mod_timer(timer, expires, false, TIMER_NOT_PINNED); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(mod_timer); -- 1.7.4.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() 2011-05-25 8:35 ` Yong Zhang @ 2011-05-25 10:17 ` Thomas Gleixner 2011-05-25 10:57 ` Thomas Gleixner 2011-05-26 6:19 ` Yong Zhang 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2011-05-25 10:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yong Zhang Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, LKML, Arjan van de Ven, Trond Myklebust, David Miller, netdev On Wed, 25 May 2011, Yong Zhang wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> wrote: > > * Yong Zhang | 2011-05-24 15:54:17 [+0800]: > > > >>> diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c > >>> index fd61986..bf09726 100644 > >>> --- a/kernel/timer.c > >>> +++ b/kernel/timer.c > >>> @@ -804,6 +804,8 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > >>> ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??return 1; > >>> > >>> ?? ?? ?? ??expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); > >> > >>So, why not move above line up, then we can use the recalculated > >>expires? > > > > We leave often before apply_slack() kicks in. From printks() it looks > > like we leave more often in first "return 1" than in the second. Moving > > that line up would lead to more __mode_timer() calls. > > Hmmm, so the reason is for a timer whose timer->slack is not set > explicitly. when we recalculate expires, we will get different value > sometimes. No, that's not the problem. > Could you please try the attached patch(webmail will mangle it) Grrr. gmail allows usage of real mail clients, doesn't it ? > diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c > index fd61986..73af53c 100644 > --- a/kernel/timer.c > +++ b/kernel/timer.c > @@ -749,6 +749,10 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > unsigned long expires_limit, mask; > int bit; > > + /* no need to account slack again for a same-expire pending timer */ > + if (timer_pending(timer) && time_after_eq(timer->expires, expires)) > + return timer->expires; That's total crap. Assume some code sets the timer with 5 seconds for some purpose and after a second it wants it to fire in 50ms from now because some state change happened. The above will keep the original 5 seconds timeout no matter what, so the requested 50ms timeout will fire about 4 seconds late. > expires_limit = expires; > > if (timer->slack >= 0) { > @@ -795,6 +799,8 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > */ > int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > { > + expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); > + We need to analyse the problem thoroughly and not slap random changes into the code without knowing about the consequences. And the problem is mostly in the call sites because they are not aware of the slack effect. The sunrpc code is one of those which are affected by the slack magic simply because it makes the mod_timer() call basically unconditional even if the jiffies value is unchanged. diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c index ce5eb68..cb0574f 100644 --- a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c @@ -1053,10 +1053,12 @@ void xprt_release(struct rpc_task *task) xprt->ops->release_request(task); if (!list_empty(&req->rq_list)) list_del(&req->rq_list); - xprt->last_used = jiffies; - if (list_empty(&xprt->recv) && xprt_has_timer(xprt)) - mod_timer(&xprt->timer, - xprt->last_used + xprt->idle_timeout); + if (xprt->last_used = jiffies) { + xprt->last_used = jiffies; + if (list_empty(&xprt->recv) && xprt_has_timer(xprt)) + mod_timer(&xprt->timer, + xprt->last_used + xprt->idle_timeout); + } spin_unlock_bh(&xprt->transport_lock); if (req->rq_buffer) xprt->ops->buf_free(req->rq_buffer); The above patch does not solve the problem when the resulting new timeout is rounded up to the same expiry value after the slack is applied, which is not unlikely when jiffies only advanced by a small amount. So we must check after apply_slack() and the reason why the first check before apply_slack triggers very often is that auto slack only changes the expiry value for timeouts >= 256 jiffies. And the main caller is the networking code via tcp_send_delayed_ack(). The standard delay we see from there is 40ms (10 jiffies for HZ=250) and that falls below the 256 jiffies treshold. The patch below is a reasonable compromise between overhead and correctness. Thanks, tglx diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c index fd61986..458fd81 100644 --- a/kernel/timer.c +++ b/kernel/timer.c @@ -749,16 +749,15 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) unsigned long expires_limit, mask; int bit; - expires_limit = expires; - if (timer->slack >= 0) { expires_limit = expires + timer->slack; } else { - unsigned long now = jiffies; + long delta = expires - jiffies; + + if (delta < 256) + return expires; - /* No slack, if already expired else auto slack 0.4% */ - if (time_after(expires, now)) - expires_limit = expires + (expires - now)/256; + expires_limit = expires + (expires - now)/256; } mask = expires ^ expires_limit; if (mask == 0) @@ -795,6 +794,8 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) */ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) { + expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); + /* * This is a common optimization triggered by the * networking code - if the timer is re-modified @@ -803,8 +804,6 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) if (timer_pending(timer) && timer->expires == expires) return 1; - expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); - return __mod_timer(timer, expires, false, TIMER_NOT_PINNED); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(mod_timer); ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() 2011-05-25 10:17 ` Thomas Gleixner @ 2011-05-25 10:57 ` Thomas Gleixner 2011-05-26 6:19 ` Yong Zhang 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2011-05-25 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Yong Zhang Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, LKML, Arjan van de Ven, Trond Myklebust, David Miller, netdev On Wed, 25 May 2011, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 25 May 2011, Yong Zhang wrote: > } else { > - unsigned long now = jiffies; > + long delta = expires - jiffies; > + > + if (delta < 256) > + return expires; > > - /* No slack, if already expired else auto slack 0.4% */ > - if (time_after(expires, now)) > - expires_limit = expires + (expires - now)/256; > + expires_limit = expires + (expires - now)/256; That should be + expires_limit = expires + delta / 256; of course. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() 2011-05-25 10:17 ` Thomas Gleixner 2011-05-25 10:57 ` Thomas Gleixner @ 2011-05-26 6:19 ` Yong Zhang 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Yong Zhang @ 2011-05-26 6:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior, LKML, Arjan van de Ven, Trond Myklebust, David Miller, netdev On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: >> Hmmm, so the reason is for a timer whose timer->slack is not set >> explicitly. when we recalculate expires, we will get different value >> sometimes. > > No, that's not the problem. > >> Could you please try the attached patch(webmail will mangle it) > > Grrr. gmail allows usage of real mail clients, doesn't it ? Yeah, but sometimes I can only access webmail due to some reason > >> diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c >> index fd61986..73af53c 100644 >> --- a/kernel/timer.c >> +++ b/kernel/timer.c >> @@ -749,6 +749,10 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) >> unsigned long expires_limit, mask; >> int bit; >> >> + /* no need to account slack again for a same-expire pending timer */ >> + if (timer_pending(timer) && time_after_eq(timer->expires, expires)) >> + return timer->expires; > > That's total crap. Assume some code sets the timer with 5 seconds for > some purpose and after a second it wants it to fire in 50ms from now > because some state change happened. The above will keep the original 5 > seconds timeout no matter what, so the requested 50ms timeout will > fire about 4 seconds late. Indeed. I forgot that case . > >> expires_limit = expires; >> >> if (timer->slack >= 0) { >> @@ -795,6 +799,8 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) >> */ >> int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) >> { >> + expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); >> + > > We need to analyse the problem thoroughly and not slap random changes > into the code without knowing about the consequences. And the problem > is mostly in the call sites because they are not aware of the slack > effect. > > The sunrpc code is one of those which are affected by the slack magic > simply because it makes the mod_timer() call basically unconditional > even if the jiffies value is unchanged. > > diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c > index ce5eb68..cb0574f 100644 > --- a/net/sunrpc/xprt.c > +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprt.c > @@ -1053,10 +1053,12 @@ void xprt_release(struct rpc_task *task) > xprt->ops->release_request(task); > if (!list_empty(&req->rq_list)) > list_del(&req->rq_list); > - xprt->last_used = jiffies; > - if (list_empty(&xprt->recv) && xprt_has_timer(xprt)) > - mod_timer(&xprt->timer, > - xprt->last_used + xprt->idle_timeout); > + if (xprt->last_used = jiffies) { Typo? s/=/!=/? > + xprt->last_used = jiffies; > + if (list_empty(&xprt->recv) && xprt_has_timer(xprt)) > + mod_timer(&xprt->timer, > + xprt->last_used + xprt->idle_timeout); > + } > spin_unlock_bh(&xprt->transport_lock); > if (req->rq_buffer) > xprt->ops->buf_free(req->rq_buffer); > > The above patch does not solve the problem when the resulting new > timeout is rounded up to the same expiry value after the slack is > applied, which is not unlikely when jiffies only advanced by a small > amount. > > So we must check after apply_slack() and the reason why the first > check before apply_slack triggers very often is that auto slack only > changes the expiry value for timeouts >= 256 jiffies. > > And the main caller is the networking code via > tcp_send_delayed_ack(). The standard delay we see from there is 40ms > (10 jiffies for HZ=250) and that falls below the 256 jiffies treshold. > > The patch below is a reasonable compromise between overhead and > correctness. Yup, I think it could smooth Sebastian's issue. Thanks, Yong > > Thanks, > > tglx > > diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c > index fd61986..458fd81 100644 > --- a/kernel/timer.c > +++ b/kernel/timer.c > @@ -749,16 +749,15 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > unsigned long expires_limit, mask; > int bit; > > - expires_limit = expires; > - > if (timer->slack >= 0) { > expires_limit = expires + timer->slack; > } else { > - unsigned long now = jiffies; > + long delta = expires - jiffies; > + > + if (delta < 256) > + return expires; > > - /* No slack, if already expired else auto slack 0.4% */ > - if (time_after(expires, now)) > - expires_limit = expires + (expires - now)/256; > + expires_limit = expires + (expires - now)/256; > } > mask = expires ^ expires_limit; > if (mask == 0) > @@ -795,6 +794,8 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > */ > int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > { > + expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); > + > /* > * This is a common optimization triggered by the > * networking code - if the timer is re-modified > @@ -803,8 +804,6 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > if (timer_pending(timer) && timer->expires == expires) > return 1; > > - expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); > - > return __mod_timer(timer, expires, false, TIMER_NOT_PINNED); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(mod_timer); > -- Only stand for myself ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [tip:timers/urgent] timers: Consider slack value in mod_timer() 2011-05-21 10:58 [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2011-05-24 7:54 ` Yong Zhang @ 2011-06-03 13:06 ` tip-bot for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: tip-bot for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2011-06-03 13:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-tip-commits; +Cc: linux-kernel, hpa, mingo, sebastian, tglx Commit-ID: 1c3cc11602111d1318c2a5743bd2e88c82813927 Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/1c3cc11602111d1318c2a5743bd2e88c82813927 Author: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> AuthorDate: Sat, 21 May 2011 12:58:28 +0200 Committer: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> CommitDate: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 15:02:32 +0200 timers: Consider slack value in mod_timer() There is an optimization which does not update the timer if the timer was pending and the expiration time was unchanged. Since commit 3bbb9ec9 ("timers: Introduce the concept of timer slack for legacy timers") this optimization is no longer applied for timers where the expiration time got extended due to the slack value. So we need to check again after the expiration time might have been updated. [ tglx: Made it a single check by applying slack first and sorting out the slack = 0 value (all timeouts < 256 jiffies) early ] Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20110521105828.GA29442@Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> --- kernel/timer.c | 15 +++++++-------- 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c index fd61986..8cff361 100644 --- a/kernel/timer.c +++ b/kernel/timer.c @@ -749,16 +749,15 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) unsigned long expires_limit, mask; int bit; - expires_limit = expires; - if (timer->slack >= 0) { expires_limit = expires + timer->slack; } else { - unsigned long now = jiffies; + long delta = expires - jiffies; + + if (delta < 256) + return expires; - /* No slack, if already expired else auto slack 0.4% */ - if (time_after(expires, now)) - expires_limit = expires + (expires - now)/256; + expires_limit = expires + delta / 256; } mask = expires ^ expires_limit; if (mask == 0) @@ -795,6 +794,8 @@ unsigned long apply_slack(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) */ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) { + expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); + /* * This is a common optimization triggered by the * networking code - if the timer is re-modified @@ -803,8 +804,6 @@ int mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) if (timer_pending(timer) && timer->expires == expires) return 1; - expires = apply_slack(timer, expires); - return __mod_timer(timer, expires, false, TIMER_NOT_PINNED); } EXPORT_SYMBOL(mod_timer); ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-06-03 13:07 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2011-05-21 10:58 [PATCH] timers: consider slack value in mod_timer() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2011-05-24 7:54 ` Yong Zhang 2011-05-24 12:13 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior 2011-05-25 8:35 ` Yong Zhang 2011-05-25 10:17 ` Thomas Gleixner 2011-05-25 10:57 ` Thomas Gleixner 2011-05-26 6:19 ` Yong Zhang 2011-06-03 13:06 ` [tip:timers/urgent] timers: Consider " tip-bot for Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.