Re: [patch] change futex_wait() to hrtimers

[Nick Piggin]

On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 10:10:06AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Roland McGrath <roland@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > I agree it should restart.  But I don't think this is quite right in 
> > the timeout case.  It will increase the total maximum real time spent 
> > arbitrarily by the amount of time elapsed in signal handlers.  Other 
> > restartable, timed calls have to convert to an absolute timeout for 
> > the restart block (and convert back when doing the restart).
> 
> i dont think we should try to do this. We should not and cannot do 
> anything about all of the artifacts that comes with the use of relative 
> timeouts and schedule_timeout().
> 
> basically, using jiffies here (which schedule_timeout() does) is 
> /fundamentally/ imprecise. If you get many interrupts, rounding errors 
> sum up - and there's nothing we can do about it!

Well I did convert futex_wait to an absolute timeout based version in
the subsequent incremental patch. I think that is OK?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/