On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 09:45 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
quoted text
> * Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net> wrote:
> 
> > Yes it does and I have two reported bugs so far.
> > 
> > In several places I have code similar to:
> > 
> > wait.tv_sec = time(NULL) + 1;
> > wait.tv_nsec = 0;
> > 
> > signaled = 0;
> > while (!signaled) {
> >         status = pthread_cond_timedwait(&cond, &mutex, &wait);
> >        if (status) {
> >              if (status == ETIMEDOUT)
> >                   break;
> >              fatal(status);
> >       }
> > }
> 
> ah! It passes in a low-res time source into a high-res time interface 
> (pthread_cond_timedwait()). Could you change the time(NULL) + 1 to 
> time(NULL) + 2, or change it to:
> 
> 	gettimeofday(&wait, NULL);
> 	wait.tv_sec++;

OK, I'm with you, hi-res timer.
But even so, how is the time in the past after adding a second.

Is it because I'm not setting tv_nsec when it's close to a second
boundary, and hence your recommendation above?

quoted text
> 
> does this solve the spinning?

I don't have a system to test this on so I'll try to get one of the
people that logged the problem to test a patch.

quoted text
> 
> i'm wondering how widespread this is. If automount is the only app doing 
> this then _maybe_ we could get away with it by changing automount?

I'm happy to change automount but that could cause odd version specific
problems for people updating their kernel on an older installed base.

Aaah .. and they'll all blame me!! ;)

Ian


-
unsubscribe notice
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/