When tick is stopped also the timer base is_idle flag is set. When
reentering timer_base_try_to_set_idle() with the tick stopped, there is no
need to check whether the timer base needs to be set idle again. When a
timer was enqueued in the meantime, this is already handled by the
tick_nohz_next_event() call which was executed before
tick_nohz_stop_tick().
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-5-anna-maria@linutronix.de
The timer base is marked idle when get_next_timer_interrupt() is
executed. But the decision whether the tick will be stopped and whether the
system is able to go idle is done later. When the timer bases is marked
idle and a new first timer is enqueued remote an IPI is raised. Even if it
is not required because the tick is not stopped and the timer base is
evaluated again at the next tick.
To prevent this, the timer base is marked idle in tick_nohz_stop_tick() and
get_next_timer_interrupt() is streamlined by only looking for the next timer
interrupt. All other work is postponed to timer_base_try_to_set_idle() which is
called by tick_nohz_stop_tick(). timer_base_try_to_set_idle() never resets
timer_base::is_idle state. This is done when the tick is restarted via
tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick().
With this, tick_sched::tick_stopped and timer_base::is_idle are always in
sync. So there is no longer the need to execute timer_clear_idle() in
tick_nohz_idle_retain_tick(). This was required before, as
tick_nohz_next_event() set timer_base::is_idle even if the tick would not be
stopped. So timer_clear_idle() is only executed, when timer base is idle. So the
check whether timer base is idle, is now no longer required as well.
While at it fix some nearby whitespace damage as well.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-4-anna-maria@linutronix.de
get_next_timer_interrupt() contains two parts for the next timer interrupt
calculation. Those two parts are separated by forwarding the base
clock. But the second part does not depend on the forwarded base
clock.
Therefore restructure get_next_timer_interrupt() to keep things together
which belong together.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240221090548.36600-2-anna-maria@linutronix.de
When no timer is queued into an empty timer base, the next_expiry will not
be updated. It was originally calculated as
base->clk + NEXT_TIMER_MAX_DELTA
When the timer base stays empty long enough (> NEXT_TIMER_MAX_DELTA), the
next_expiry value of the empty base suggests that there is a timer pending
soon. This might be more a kind of a theoretical problem, but the fix
doesn't hurt.
Use only base->next_expiry value as nextevt when timers are
pending. Otherwise nextevt will be jiffies + NEXT_TIMER_MAX_DELTA. As all
information is in place, update base->next_expiry value of the empty timer
base as well.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-13-anna-maria@linutronix.de
To improve readability of the code, split base->idle calculation and
expires calculation into separate parts. While at it, update the comment
about timer base idle marking.
Thereby the following subtle change happens if the next event is just one
jiffy ahead and the tick was already stopped: Originally base->is_idle
remains true in this situation. Now base->is_idle turns to false. This may
spare an IPI if a timer is enqueued remotely to an idle CPU that is going
to tick on the next jiffy.
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>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-12-anna-maria@linutronix.de
Forwarding timer base is done when the next expiry value is calculated and
when a new timer is enqueued. When the next expiry value is calculated the
jiffies value is already available and does not need to be reread a second
time.
Splitting out the forward timer base functionality to make it executable
via both contextes - those where jiffies are already known and those, where
jiffies need to be read.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-10-anna-maria@linutronix.de
The current check whether a forward of the timer base is required can be
simplified by using an already existing comparison function which is easier
to read. The related comment is outdated and was not updated when the check
changed in commit 36cd28a4cd ("timers: Lower base clock forwarding
threshold").
Use time_before_eq() for the check and replace the comment by copying the
comment from the same check inside get_next_timer_interrupt(). Move the
precious information of the outdated comment to the proper place in
__run_timers().
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-9-anna-maria@linutronix.de
Deferrable timers do not prevent CPU from going idle and are not taken into
account on idle path. Sending an IPI to a remote CPU when a new first
deferrable timer was enqueued will wake up the remote CPU but nothing will
be done regarding the deferrable timers.
Drop IPI completely when a new first deferrable timer was enqueued.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-7-anna-maria@linutronix.de
For starting a timer, the timer is enqueued into a bucket of the timer
wheel. The bucket expiry is the defacto expiry of the timer but it is not
equal the timer expiry because of increasing granularity when bucket is in
a higher level of the wheel. To be able to figure out in a trace whether a
timer expired in time or not, the bucket expiry time is required as well.
Add bucket expiry time to the timer_start tracepoint and thereby simplify
the arguments.
Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231201092654.34614-5-anna-maria@linutronix.de
Tearing down timers which have circular dependencies to other
functionality, e.g. workqueues, where the timer can schedule work and work
can arm timers, is not trivial.
In those cases it is desired to shutdown the timer in a way which prevents
rearming of the timer. The mechanism to do so is to set timer->function to
NULL and use this as an indicator for the timer arming functions to ignore
the (re)arm request.
Expose new interfaces for this: timer_shutdown_sync() and timer_shutdown().
timer_shutdown_sync() has the same functionality as timer_delete_sync()
plus the NULL-ification of the timer function.
timer_shutdown() has the same functionality as timer_delete() plus the
NULL-ification of the timer function.
In both cases the rearming of the timer is prevented by silently discarding
rearm attempts due to timer->function being NULL.
Co-developed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220407161745.7d6754b3@gandalf.local.home
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221110064101.429013735@goodmis.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221123201625.314230270@linutronix.de
Tearing down timers which have circular dependencies to other
functionality, e.g. workqueues, where the timer can schedule work and work
can arm timers, is not trivial.
In those cases it is desired to shutdown the timer in a way which prevents
rearming of the timer. The mechanism to do so is to set timer->function to
NULL and use this as an indicator for the timer arming functions to ignore
the (re)arm request.
In preparation for that replace the warnings in the relevant code paths
with checks for timer->function == NULL. If the pointer is NULL, then
discard the rearm request silently.
Add debug_assert_init() instead of the WARN_ON_ONCE(!timer->function)
checks so that debug objects can warn about non-initialized timers.
The warning of debug objects does not warn if timer->function == NULL. It
warns when timer was not initialized using timer_setup[_on_stack]() or via
DEFINE_TIMER(). If developers fail to enable debug objects and then waste
lots of time to figure out why their non-initialized timer is not firing,
they deserve it. Same for initializing a timer with a NULL function.
Co-developed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220407161745.7d6754b3@gandalf.local.home
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221110064101.429013735@goodmis.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/87wn7kdann.ffs@tglx
The timer code still has a few BUG_ON()s left which are crashing the kernel
in situations where it still can recover or simply refuse to take an
action.
Remove the one in the hotplug callback which checks for the CPU being
offline. If that happens then the whole hotplug machinery will explode in
colourful ways.
Replace the rest with WARN_ON_ONCE() and conditional returns where
appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221123201624.769128888@linutronix.de
del_singleshot_timer_sync() used to be an optimization for deleting timers
which are not rearmed from the timer callback function.
This optimization turned out to be broken and got mapped to
del_timer_sync() about 17 years ago.
Get rid of the undocumented indirection and use del_timer_sync() directly.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221123201624.706987932@linutronix.de
