Re: timerfd waking up before timer really expires
From: Lucas De Marchi
Date: Wed Mar 04 2015 - 10:20:29 EST
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 5:06 AM, Clemens Ladisch <clemens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>> I was debugging my application and noticed that a timerfd event was being
>> triggered *before* the timer expires.
>>
>> I reduced the scope of the program to test a single timerfd and measure the
>> difference in the result of clock_gettime() between two reads.
>>
>> loop_time_fd = setup_timerfd(interval, 0);
>> do {
>> read(loop_time_fd, &events, sizeof(events));
>> ... = now_usec();
>> } while (1);
>>
>> For whatever interval I configure and 10000 iterations, what I'm seeing in the
>> elapsed vector are values like
>>
>> interval +- 70usec
>
> Let us assume that the timer itself is perfectly accurate, and that all
> wakeups of your program are immediately when the timerfd becomes ready,
> except for one iteration, where there is a scheduling delay. Then the
> measured interval before this delayed wakeup is longer, while the
> measured interval after this wakeup is shorter by the same amount.
>
> To detect early wakeups, you must not check whether the interval between
> two consecutive wakeups is too short, but whether the interval between
> a wakeup and the time when the timerfd was actually started is shorter
> than N Ã the timer interval.
oohh, /me blushes...
That makes perfect sense since I'm not re-arming the timer for another
period and instead timerfd is doing it for me. If fixed it in my code
and then for 10k iterations and an interval of 1ms I have
(number-of-occurrences time):
9959 1000
9 1001
12 1002
5 1003
5 1004
2 1005
1 1009
2 1010
1 1012
1 1016
1 1018
1 1024
1 1027
None with < 1ms and max latency of 27us.
Thanks
--
Lucas De Marchi
--
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/