Re: [PATCH 0/3] hrtimer: HRTIMER_STATE_ fixes

2015-06-08 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 06/08, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 17:10 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > On 06/08, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > > > I tend to agree, but I think its a pre-existing problem, not one > > > > > introduced by my proposed pat

Re: [PATCH 0/3] hrtimer: HRTIMER_STATE_ fixes

2015-06-08 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 19:11 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Ah, yes, we could introduce timerqueue_is_queued() which uses > > RB_EMPTY_NODE(). Obviating the need for hrtimer::state entirely. > > Which won't work for the migration case unless we have some trickery > like we do with double linked

Re: [PATCH 0/3] hrtimer: HRTIMER_STATE_ fixes

2015-06-08 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Mon, 8 Jun 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 17:10 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 06/08, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > I tend to agree, but I think its a pre-existing problem, not one > > > > introduced by my proposed patch. > > > > > > Something like this would fix t

Re: [PATCH 0/3] hrtimer: HRTIMER_STATE_ fixes

2015-06-08 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 06/08, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 17:10 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 06/08, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > > I tend to agree, but I think its a pre-existing problem, not one > > > > introduced by my proposed patch. > > > > > > Something like this would fix that I th

Re: [PATCH 0/3] hrtimer: HRTIMER_STATE_ fixes

2015-06-08 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 17:10 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 06/08, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > I tend to agree, but I think its a pre-existing problem, not one > > > introduced by my proposed patch. > > > > Something like this would fix that I think. It fully preserves > > timer->state over hr

[PATCH 0/3] hrtimer: HRTIMER_STATE_ fixes

2015-06-08 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 06/08, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > I tend to agree, but I think its a pre-existing problem, not one > > introduced by my proposed patch. > > Something like this would fix that I think. It fully preserves > timer->state over hrtimer_start_range_ns(). Yes, but I think we can do a bit better. Onl