If posix_cpu_timer_del() exits early due to task not found or sighand
invalid, it fails to clear the state of the timer. That's harmless but
inconsistent.
These early exits are accounted as successful delete. Move the update of
the timer state into the success return path, so all "successful" deletions
are handled.
Reported-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241105064212.974053438@linutronix.de
clocksource_delta() has two variants. One with a check for negative motion,
which is only selected by x86. This is a historic leftover as this function
was previously used in the time getter hot paths.
Since 135225a363 timekeeping_cycles_to_ns() has unconditional protection
against this as a by-product of the protection against 64bit math overflow.
clocksource_delta() is only used in the clocksource watchdog and in
timekeeping_advance(). The extra conditional there is not hurting anyone.
Remove the config option and unconditionally prevent negative motion of the
readout.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241031120328.599430157@linutronix.de
Since 135225a363 timekeeping_cycles_to_ns() handles large offsets which
would lead to 64bit multiplication overflows correctly. It's also protected
against negative motion of the clocksource unconditionally, which was
exclusive to x86 before.
timekeeping_advance() handles large offsets already correctly.
That means the value of CONFIG_DEBUG_TIMEKEEPING which analyzed these cases
is very close to zero. Remove all of it.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241031120328.536010148@linutronix.de
The way the clockevent devices are finally stopped while a CPU is
offlining is currently chaotic. The layout being by order:
1) tick_sched_timer_dying() stops the tick and the underlying clockevent
but only for oneshot case. The periodic tick and its related
clockevent still runs.
2) tick_broadcast_offline() detaches and stops the per-cpu oneshot
broadcast and append it to the released list.
3) Some individual clockevent drivers stop the clockevents (a second time if
the tick is oneshot)
4) Once the CPU is dead, a control CPU remotely detaches and stops
(a 3rd time if oneshot mode) the CPU clockevent and adds it to the
released list.
5) The released list containing the broadcast device released on step 2)
and the remotely detached clockevent from step 4) are unregistered.
These random events can be factorized if the current clockevent is
detached and stopped by the dying CPU at the generic layer, that is
from the dying CPU:
a) Stop the tick
b) Stop/detach the underlying per-cpu oneshot broadcast clockevent
c) Stop/detach the underlying clockevent
d) Release / unregister the clockevents from b) and c)
e) Release / unregister the remaining clockevents from the dying CPU.
This part could be performed by the dying CPU
This way the drivers and the tick layer don't need to care about
clockevent operations during cpuhotplug down. This also unifies the tick
behaviour on offline CPUs between oneshot and periodic modes, avoiding
offline ticks altogether for sanity.
Adopt the simplification.
[ tglx: Remove the WARN_ON() in clockevents_register_device() as that
is called from an upcoming CPU before the CPU is marked online ]
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241029125451.54574-3-frederic@kernel.org
When a new clockevent device is added and replaces a previous device,
the latter is put into the released list. Then the released list is
added back.
This may look counter-intuitive but the reason is that released device
might be suitable for other uses. For example a released CPU regular
clockevent can be a better replacement for the current broadcast event.
Similarly a released broadcast clockevent can be a better replacement
for the current regular clockevent of a given CPU.
Improve comments stating about these subtleties.
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241029125451.54574-2-frederic@kernel.org
secs_to_jiffies() is defined in hci_event.c and cannot be reused by
other call sites. Hoist it into the core code to allow conversion of the
~1150 usages of msecs_to_jiffies() that either:
- use a multiplier value of 1000 or equivalently MSEC_PER_SEC, or
- have timeouts that are denominated in seconds (i.e. end in 000)
It's implemented as a macro to allow usage in static initializers.
This will also allow conversion of yet more sites that use (sec * HZ)
directly, and improve their readability.
Suggested-by: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@outlook.com>
Signed-off-by: Easwar Hariharan <eahariha@linux.microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.von.dentz@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241030-open-coded-timeouts-v3-1-9ba123facf88@linux.microsoft.com
Right now the state tracking is done by two struct members:
- it_active:
A boolean which tracks armed/disarmed state
- it_signal_seq:
A sequence counter which is used to invalidate settings
and prevent rearming
Replace it_active with it_status and keep properly track about the states
in one place.
This allows to reuse it_signal_seq to track reprogramming, disarm and
delete operations in order to drop signals which are related to the state
previous of those operations.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241001083835.670337048@linutronix.de
No point in delivering a signal from the past. POSIX does not specify the
behaviour here:
- "The effect of disarming or resetting a timer with pending expiration
notifications is unspecified."
- "The disposition of pending signals for the deleted timer is unspecified."
In both cases it is reasonable to expect that pending signals are
discarded. Especially in the reprogramming case it does not make sense to
account for previous overruns or to deliver a signal for a timer which has
been disarmed.
Drop the signal as that is conistent and understandable behaviour.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241001083835.553646280@linutronix.de
In case that a timer was reprogrammed or deleted an already pending signal
is obsolete. Right now such signals are kept around and eventually
delivered. While POSIX is blury about this:
- "The effect of disarming or resetting a timer with pending expiration
notifications is unspecified."
- "The disposition of pending signals for the deleted timer is
unspecified."
it is reasonable in both cases to expect that pending signals are discarded
as they have no meaning anymore.
Prepare the signal code to allow dropping posix timer signals.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241001083835.494416923@linutronix.de
The si_sys_private member of the siginfo which is embedded in the
preallocated sigqueue is used by the posix timer code to decide whether a
timer must be reprogrammed on signal delivery.
The handling of this is racy as a long standing comment in that code
documents. It is modified with the timer lock held, but without sighand
lock being held. The actual signal delivery code checks for it under
sighand lock without holding the timer lock.
Hand the new value to send_sigqueue() as argument and store it with sighand
lock held. This is an intermediate change to address this issue.
The arguments to this function will be cleanup in subsequent changes.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241001083835.434338954@linutronix.de
The details about the handling of the "normal" values were moved
to the _msecs_to_jiffies() helpers in commit ca42aaf0c8 ("time:
Refactor msecs_to_jiffies"). However, the same commit still mentioned
__msecs_to_jiffies() in the added documentation.
Thus point to _msecs_to_jiffies() instead.
Fixes: ca42aaf0c8 ("time: Refactor msecs_to_jiffies")
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241025110141.157205-2-ojeda@kernel.org
The documentation's intention is to compare msecs_to_jiffies() (first
sentence) with __msecs_to_jiffies() (second sentence), which is what the
original documentation did. One of the cleanups in commit f3cb80804b
("time: Fix various kernel-doc problems") may have thought the paragraph
was talking about the latter since that is what it is being documented.
Thus revert that part of the change.
Fixes: f3cb80804b ("time: Fix various kernel-doc problems")
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241025110141.157205-1-ojeda@kernel.org
Updates of the timekeeper can be done by operating on the shadow timekeeper
and afterwards copying the result into the real timekeeper. This has the
advantage, that the sequence count write protected region is kept as small
as possible.
Convert do_adjtimex() to use this scheme and take the opportunity to use a
scoped_guard() for locking.
That requires to have a separate function for updating the leap state so
that the update is protected by the sequence count. This also brings the
timekeeper and the shadow timekeeper in sync for this state, which was not
the case so far. That's not a correctness problem as the state is only used
at the read sides which use the real timekeeper, but it's inconsistent
nevertheless.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-23-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
Updates of the timekeeper can be done by operating on the shadow timekeeper
and afterwards copying the result into the real timekeeper. This has the
advantage, that the sequence count write protected region is kept as small
as possible.
While the sequence count held time is not relevant for the resume path as
there is no concurrency, there is no reason to have this function
different than all the other update sites.
Convert timekeeping_inject_offset() to use this scheme and cleanup the
variable declarations while at it.
As halt_fast_timekeeper() does not need protection sequence counter, it is
no problem to move it with this change outside of the sequence counter
protected area. But it still needs to be executed while holding the lock.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-22-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
Updates of the timekeeper can be done by operating on the shadow timekeeper
and afterwards copying the result into the real timekeeper. This has the
advantage, that the sequence count write protected region is kept as small
as possible.
While the sequence count held time is not relevant for the resume path as
there is no concurrency, there is no reason to have this function
different than all the other update sites.
Convert timekeeping_inject_offset() to use this scheme and cleanup the
variable declaration while at it.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-21-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
Updates of the timekeeper can be done by operating on the shadow timekeeper
and afterwards copying the result into the real timekeeper. This has the
advantage, that the sequence count write protected region is kept as small
as possible.
Convert timekeeping_inject_offset() to use this scheme.
That allows to use a scoped_guard() for locking the timekeeper lock as the
usage of the shadow timekeeper allows a rollback in the error case instead
of the full timekeeper update of the original code.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-17-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
Updates of the timekeeper can be done by operating on the shadow timekeeper
and afterwards copying the result into the real timekeeper. This has the
advantage, that the sequence count write protected region is kept as small
as possible.
Convert do_settimeofday64() to use this scheme.
That allows to use a scoped_guard() for locking the timekeeper lock as the
usage of the shadow timekeeper allows a rollback in the error case instead
of the full timekeeper update of the original code.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-16-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
Functions which operate on the real timekeeper, e.g. do_settimeofday(),
have error conditions. If they are hit a full timekeeping update is still
required because the already committed operations modified the timekeeper.
When switching these functions to operate on the shadow timekeeper then the
full update can be avoided in the error case, but the modified shadow
timekeeper has to be restored.
Provide a helper function for that.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-15-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
timekeeping_advance() is the only optimized function which uses
shadow_timekeeper for updating the real timekeeper to keep the sequence
counter protected region as small as possible.
To be able to transform timekeeper updates in other functions to use the
same logic, split out functionality into a separate function
timekeeper_update_staged().
While at it, document the reason why the sequence counter must be write
held over the call to timekeeping_update() and the copying to the real
timekeeper and why using a pointer based update is suboptimal.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-13-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
Updates of the timekeeper are done in two ways:
1. Updating timekeeper and afterwards memcpy()'ing the result into
shadow_timekeeper using timekeeping_update(). Used everywhere for
updates except in timekeeping_advance(); the sequence counter protected
region starts before the first change to the timekeeper is done.
2. Updating shadow_timekeeper and then memcpy()'ing the result into
timekeeper. Used only by in timekeeping_advance(); The seqence counter
protected region is only around timekeeping_update() and the memcpy for
copy from shadow to timekeeper.
The second option is fast path optimized. The sequence counter protected
region is as short as possible.
As this behaviour is mainly documented by commit messages, but not in code,
it makes the not easy timekeeping code more complicated to read.
There is no reason why updates to the timekeeper can't use the optimized
version everywhere. With this, the code will be cleaner, as code is reused
instead of duplicated.
To be able to access tk_data which contains all required information, add a
pointer to tk_data as an argument to timekeeping_update(). With that
convert the comment about holding the lock into a lockdep assert.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-12-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
timekeeper_lock protects updates to struct tk_core but is not part of
struct tk_core. As long as there is only a single timekeeper, this is not a
problem. But when the timekeeper infrastructure will be reused for per ptp
clock timekeepers, timekeeper_lock needs to be part of tk_core.
Move the lock into tk_core, move initialisation of the lock and sequence
counter into timekeeping_init() and update all users of timekeeper_lock.
As this is touching all lock sites, convert them to use:
guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave)(&tk_core.lock);
instead of lock/unlock functions whenever possible.
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-9-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
tk_core requires shadow_timekeeper to allow timekeeping_advance() updating
without holding the timekeeper sequence count write locked. This allows the
readers to make progress up to the actual update where the shadow
timekeeper is copied over to the real timekeeper.
As long as there is only a single timekeeper, having them separate is
fine. But when the timekeeper infrastructure will be reused for per ptp
clock timekeepers, shadow_timekeeper needs to be part of tk_core.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241009-devel-anna-maria-b4-timers-ptp-timekeeping-v2-7-554456a44a15@linutronix.de
struct timekeeper is ordered suboptimal vs. cachelines. The layout,
including the preceding seqcount (see struct tk_core in timekeeper.c) is:
cacheline 0: seqcount, tkr_mono
cacheline 1: tkr_raw, xtime_sec
cacheline 2: ktime_sec ... tai_offset, internal variables
cacheline 3: next_leap_ktime, raw_sec, internal variables
cacheline 4: internal variables
So any access to via ktime_get*() except for access to CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
will use either cachelines 0 + 1 or cachelines 0 + 2. Access to
CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW uses cachelines 0 + 1 + 3.
Reorder the members so that the result is more efficient:
cacheline 0: seqcount, tkr_mono
cacheline 1: xtime_sec, ktime_sec ... tai_offset
cacheline 2: tkr_raw, raw_sec
cacheline 3: internal variables
cacheline 4: internal variables
That means ktime_get*() will access cacheline 0 + 1 and CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
access will use cachelines 0 + 2.
Update kernel-doc and fix formatting issues while at it. Also fix a typo
in struct tk_read_base kernel-doc.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241015100839.12702-1-anna-maria@linutronix.de
Thomas Gleixner
Frederic Weisbecker
Easwar Hariharan
Miguel Ojeda
Anna-Maria Behnsen
Julia Lawall