On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 February 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > can you please apply the following patch ? I really should have
> > thought about that, when I fixed the above one.
>
> I still get the bug with this patch. At least I'm now certain it happens
> during glibc compilation and that I can reproduce it.
>
> I applied your patch on top of 2.6.24.2 (applied with only minor offsets)
> because I also saw the issue with that kernel and I don't yet completely
> trust 2.6.25.
>
> Here's the error from this run:
> WARNING: at kernel/time/clockevents.c:82 clockevents_program_event()
> Pid: 27638, comm: ld-linux.so.2 Not tainted 2.6.24.2-test1 #39
>
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff8024afaf>] ktime_get+0xc/0x41
> [<ffffffff8024ea59>] clockevents_program_event+0x3b/0x94
> [<ffffffff8024f8c8>] tick_program_event+0x31/0x4d
> [<ffffffff8024a2fd>] hrtimer_reprogram+0x3b/0x51
> [<ffffffff8024a478>] enqueue_hrtimer+0x66/0x102
> [<ffffffff8024ad38>] hrtimer_start+0x102/0x125
> [<ffffffff8819f403>] :ext3:__ext3_journal_stop+0x1f/0x3d
> [<ffffffff803f8dcc>] rt_mutex_slowlock+0x90/0x53a
> [<ffffffff802667e8>] find_lock_page+0x29/0x8d
> [<ffffffff80277a78>] find_extend_vma+0x16/0x59
> [<ffffffff802509b2>] get_futex_key+0x82/0x14e
> [<ffffffff80251ac5>] futex_lock_pi+0x60f/0x90d
futex_lock_pi is called with an absolute timeout, which is based on
CLOCK_REALTIME. Nothing wrong with that, but the clockevents WARN_ON
might trap over a false positive, when the expiry value is less than
base->offset. This was intentional before we put the WARN_ON into the
clockevents code.
The patch below should fix this issue.
Thanks,
tglx
Subject: hrtimer-fix-abs-clock-realtime.patch
From: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:58:36 +0100
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
kernel/hrtimer.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
Index: linux-2.6/kernel/hrtimer.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/kernel/hrtimer.c
+++ linux-2.6/kernel/hrtimer.c
@@ -425,6 +425,8 @@ static int hrtimer_reprogram(struct hrti
ktime_t expires = ktime_sub(timer->expires, base->offset);
int res;
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(timer->expires.tv64 < 0);
+
/*
* When the callback is running, we do not reprogram the clock event
* device. The timer callback is either running on a different CPU or
@@ -435,6 +437,15 @@ static int hrtimer_reprogram(struct hrti
if (hrtimer_callback_running(timer))
return 0;
+ /*
+ * CLOCK_REALTIME timer might be requested with an absolute
+ * expiry time which is less than base->offset. Nothing wrong
+ * about that, just avoid to call into the tick code, which
+ * has now objections against negative expiry values.
+ */
+ if (expires.tv64 < 0)
+ return -ETIME;
+
if (expires.tv64 >= expires_next->tv64)
return 0;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
