Re: [PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-17 Thread Peter Xu
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 02:07:48PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Peter, > > On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, Peter Xu wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 08:09:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > You might argue that in case of an explicit pinned timer, the above logic > > > is wrong when the timer is

Re: [PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-17 Thread Thomas Gleixner
Peter, On Mon, 17 Jun 2019, Peter Xu wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 08:09:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > You might argue that in case of an explicit pinned timer, the above logic > > is wrong when the timer is modified as it might move to a different > > CPU. But from day one when the

Re: [PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-17 Thread Peter Xu
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 08:09:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Peter, Hi, Thomas, Thanks for replying. > > On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Peter Xu wrote: > > > get_target_base() in the timer code is not using the "base" parameter > > at all. My gut feeling is that instead of removing that extra > >

Re: [PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-17 Thread Thomas Gleixner
Peter, On Mon, 3 Jun 2019, Peter Xu wrote: > get_target_base() in the timer code is not using the "base" parameter > at all. My gut feeling is that instead of removing that extra > parameter, what we really want to do is "return the old base if it > does not suite for a new one". Gut feelings

Re: [PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-16 Thread Peter Xu
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:29:44PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > get_target_base() in the timer code is not using the "base" parameter > at all. My gut feeling is that instead of removing that extra > parameter, what we really want to do is "return the old base if it > does not suite for a new one".

Re: [PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-09 Thread Peter Xu
On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 12:28:08PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:29:44PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > > get_target_base() in the timer code is not using the "base" parameter > > at all. My gut feeling is that instead of removing that extra > > parameter, what we really

Re: [PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-06 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:29:44PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > get_target_base() in the timer code is not using the "base" parameter > at all. My gut feeling is that instead of removing that extra > parameter, what we really want to do is "return the old base if it > does not suite for a new one".

Re: [PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-03 Thread Peter Xu
On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:29:44PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > get_target_base() in the timer code is not using the "base" parameter > at all. My gut feeling is that instead of removing that extra > parameter, what we really want to do is "return the old base if it > does not suite for a new one".

[PATCH] timers: Fix up get_target_base() to use old base properly

2019-06-03 Thread Peter Xu
get_target_base() in the timer code is not using the "base" parameter at all. My gut feeling is that instead of removing that extra parameter, what we really want to do is "return the old base if it does not suite for a new one". CC: Thomas Gleixner CC: John Stultz CC: Stephen Boyd CC: Luiz