Re: [PATCH] Re: itimer oddness in 2.6.12

[Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>]

George Anzinger wrote:
> Tom Marshall wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 08:21:25PM +0100, Paulo Marques wrote:
> >
> > > Tom Marshall wrote:
> > >
> > > > The patch to fix "setitimer timer expires too early" is causing 
> > > > issues for
> > > > the Helix server.  We have a timer processs that updates the server's
> > > > timestamp on an itimer and it expects the signal to be delivered at 
> > > > roughly
> > > > the interval retrieved from getitimer.  This is very consistent on 
> > > > every
> > > > platform, including Linux up to 2.6.11, but breaks on 2.6.12.  On 
> > > > 2.6.12,
> > > > setting the itimer to 10ms and retrieving the actual interval from 
> > > > getitimer
> > > > reports 10.998ms, but the timer interrupts are consistently 
> > > > delivered at
> > > > roughly 11.998ms.  
> > >
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, this is not so clear cut as it seems :(
>
>
> Oops!  That patch is wrong.  The +1 should be applied to the initial 
> interval _only_.  We KNOW when the repeating intervals start (i.e. at 
> the jiffie edge) and don't need to adjust them.  The patch, however, 
> incorrectly, rolls them all into one.  The attach patch should fix the 
> problem.  Warnning, it compiles and boots, but I have not tested it.

Can this get into 2.6.13? Or stable if it's too late? This would appear 
to be a fix to a visible problem.

--
   -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
 last possible moment - but no longer"  -me

-
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/