On Sun, 25 May 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > - preempt_disable(); /* TSC's are per-cpu */
> > + preempt_disable();
> > + cpu = smp_processor_id();
> > rdtscl(bclock);
> > do {
> > rep_nop();
> > rdtscl(now);
> > + /* Allow RT tasks to run */
> > + preempt_enable();
> > + preempt_disable();
> > + /*
> > + * It is possible that we moved to another CPU,
> > + * and since TSC's are per-cpu we need to
> > + * calculate that. The delay must guarantee that
> > + * we wait "at least" the amount of time. Being
> > + * moved to another CPU could make the wait longer
> > + * but we just need to make sure we waited long
> > + * enough. Rebalance the counter for this CPU.
> > + */
> > + if (unlikely(cpu != smp_processor_id())) {
>
> Eeek, once you migrated you do this all the time. you need to update
> cpu here.
Good catch! I'll update that.
>
> > + if ((now-bclock) >= loops)
> > + break;
>
> Also this is really dangerous with unsynchronized TSCs. You might get
> migrated and return immediately because the TSC on the other CPU is
> far ahead.
No it isn't ;-)
The now and bclock are both from before the migration. The cpus were the
same becaues we were under preempt disbled at the time. I recalculate
after the change has been noticed.
But you are right, I forgot to update cpu. :-/
>
> What you really want is something like the patch below, but we should
> reuse the sched_clock_cpu() thingy to make that simpler. Looking into
> that right now.
>
Sure, but this should be simple enough.
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
