linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "tip-bot2 for Frederic Weisbecker" <tip-bot2@linutronix.de>
To: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [tip: timers/core] posix-cpu-timers: Force next_expiration recalc after timer deletion
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 15:13:34 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <162860841456.395.13269805420473115791.tip-bot2@tip-bot2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210726125513.271824-3-frederic@kernel.org>

The following commit has been merged into the timers/core branch of tip:

Commit-ID:     175cc3ab28e3509ddee8de4f164b563d99daa570
Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/175cc3ab28e3509ddee8de4f164b563d99daa570
Author:        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
AuthorDate:    Mon, 26 Jul 2021 14:55:09 +02:00
Committer:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
CommitterDate: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 17:09:59 +02:00

posix-cpu-timers: Force next_expiration recalc after timer deletion

A timer deletion only dequeues the timer but it doesn't shutdown
the related costly process wide cputimer counter and the tick dependency.

The following code snippet keeps this overhead around for one week after
the timer deletion:

	void trigger_process_counter(void)
	{
		timer_t id;
		struct itimerspec val = { };

		val.it_value.tv_sec = 604800;
		timer_create(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, NULL, &id);
		timer_settime(id, 0, &val, NULL);
		timer_delete(id);
	}

Make sure the next target's tick recalculates the nearest expiration and
clears the process wide counter and tick dependency if necessary.

Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210726125513.271824-3-frederic@kernel.org

---
 include/linux/posix-timers.h   |  4 +++-
 kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/posix-timers.h b/include/linux/posix-timers.h
index 896c16d..4cf1fbe 100644
--- a/include/linux/posix-timers.h
+++ b/include/linux/posix-timers.h
@@ -82,12 +82,14 @@ static inline bool cpu_timer_enqueue(struct timerqueue_head *head,
 	return timerqueue_add(head, &ctmr->node);
 }
 
-static inline void cpu_timer_dequeue(struct cpu_timer *ctmr)
+static inline bool cpu_timer_dequeue(struct cpu_timer *ctmr)
 {
 	if (ctmr->head) {
 		timerqueue_del(ctmr->head, &ctmr->node);
 		ctmr->head = NULL;
+		return true;
 	}
+	return false;
 }
 
 static inline u64 cpu_timer_getexpires(struct cpu_timer *ctmr)
diff --git a/kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c b/kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c
index 4693d3c..61c78b6 100644
--- a/kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c
+++ b/kernel/time/posix-cpu-timers.c
@@ -408,6 +408,37 @@ static int posix_cpu_timer_create(struct k_itimer *new_timer)
 }
 
 /*
+ * Dequeue the timer and reset the base if it was its earliest expiration.
+ * It makes sure the next tick recalculates the base next expiration so we
+ * don't keep the costly process wide cputime counter around for a random
+ * amount of time, along with the tick dependency.
+ *
+ * If another timer gets queued between this and the next tick, its
+ * expiration will update the base next event if necessary on the next
+ * tick.
+ */
+static void disarm_timer(struct k_itimer *timer, struct task_struct *p)
+{
+	struct cpu_timer *ctmr = &timer->it.cpu;
+	struct posix_cputimer_base *base;
+	int clkidx;
+
+	if (!cpu_timer_dequeue(ctmr))
+		return;
+
+	clkidx = CPUCLOCK_WHICH(timer->it_clock);
+
+	if (CPUCLOCK_PERTHREAD(timer->it_clock))
+		base = p->posix_cputimers.bases + clkidx;
+	else
+		base = p->signal->posix_cputimers.bases + clkidx;
+
+	if (cpu_timer_getexpires(ctmr) == base->nextevt)
+		base->nextevt = 0;
+}
+
+
+/*
  * Clean up a CPU-clock timer that is about to be destroyed.
  * This is called from timer deletion with the timer already locked.
  * If we return TIMER_RETRY, it's necessary to release the timer's lock
@@ -441,7 +472,7 @@ static int posix_cpu_timer_del(struct k_itimer *timer)
 		if (timer->it.cpu.firing)
 			ret = TIMER_RETRY;
 		else
-			cpu_timer_dequeue(ctmr);
+			disarm_timer(timer, p);
 
 		unlock_task_sighand(p, &flags);
 	}

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-10 15:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-26 12:55 [GIT PULL] posix-cpu-timers leftover overhead fixes Frederic Weisbecker
2021-07-26 12:55 ` [PATCH 1/6] posix-cpu-timers: Assert task sighand is locked while starting cputime counter Frederic Weisbecker
2021-08-10 15:13   ` [tip: timers/core] " tip-bot2 for Frederic Weisbecker
2021-07-26 12:55 ` [PATCH 2/6] posix-cpu-timers: Force next_expiration recalc after timer deletion Frederic Weisbecker
2021-08-10 15:13   ` tip-bot2 for Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2021-07-26 12:55 ` [PATCH 3/6] posix-cpu-timers: Force next expiration recalc after itimer reset Frederic Weisbecker
2021-08-10 15:13   ` [tip: timers/core] " tip-bot2 for Frederic Weisbecker
2021-07-26 12:55 ` [PATCH 4/6] posix-cpu-timers: Remove confusing error code override Frederic Weisbecker
2021-08-10 15:13   ` [tip: timers/core] posix-cpu-timers: Remove confusing return value override tip-bot2 for Frederic Weisbecker
2021-07-26 12:55 ` [PATCH 5/6] posix-cpu-timers: Consolidate timer base accessor Frederic Weisbecker
2021-08-10 15:13   ` [tip: timers/core] " tip-bot2 for Frederic Weisbecker
2021-07-26 12:55 ` [PATCH 6/6] posix-cpu-timers: Recalc next expiration when timer_settime() ends up not queueing Frederic Weisbecker
2021-08-10 15:13   ` [tip: timers/core] " tip-bot2 for Frederic Weisbecker

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=162860841456.395.13269805420473115791.tip-bot2@tip-bot2 \
    --to=tip-bot2@linutronix.de \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).