Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1736218
| From | Vallish Vaidyeshwara <vallish@amazon.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] enable hires timer to timeout datagram socket |
| Date | 2017-09-21 00:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <urVYD-MK-31@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <unvgl-1Cc-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <unvgl-1Cc-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <unwFs-2mq-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <unwYN-2QU-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <uqhTz-886-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 11:47:56AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 8 Sep 2017, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On Fri, 2017-09-08 at 11:55 -0700, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 10:26:45AM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > > > From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> > > > > Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 18:23:22 +0100 > > > > > > > > > I don't know that anyone's ever tried saying "show me the chapter > > > and > > > > > verse of the documentation" > > > > > > > > Do you know why I brought this up? Because the person I am replying > > > > to told me that the syscall documentation should have suggested this > > > > or that. > > > > > > > > That's why. > > > > > > :-) My intention was for sure not to upset anybody. > > > > > > Just to reiterate, the point of patch is simple, there was a change in > > > behavior in the system call from one kernel version to the other. As I > > > mentioned, I agree that the userspace could use other means to achieve > > > the same, but still the system call behavior has changed. > > > > > > > > > > > So let's concentrate on the other aspects of my reply, ok? > > > > > > I agree. I would prefer to understand here what is the technical > > > reason not to accept these patches other than "use other system > > > calls". > > > > So if we need to replace all 'legacy' timers to high resolution timer, > > because some application was _relying_ on jiffies being kind of precise, > > maybe it is better to revert the change done on legacy timers. > > Which would be a major step back in terms of timer performance and system > disturbance caused by massive recascading operations. > > > Or continue the migration and make them use high res internally. > > > > select() and poll() are the standard way to have precise timeouts, > > it is silly we have to maintain a timeout handling in the datagram fast > > path. > > A few years ago we switched select/poll over to use hrtimers because the > wheel timers were too inaccurate for some operations, so it feels > consequent to switch the timeout in the datagram rcv path over as well. I > agree that the whole timeout magic there feels silly, but unfortunately > it's a documented property of sockets. > > Thanks, > > tglx > Hello Thomas, Thanks for your comments. This patch has been NACK'ed by David Miller. Is there any other approach to solve this problem with out application code being recompiled? Thanks. -Vallish
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] enable hires timer to timeout datagram socket Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-09-16 11:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] enable hires timer to timeout datagram socket Vallish Vaidyeshwara <vallish@amazon.com> - 2017-09-21 00:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] enable hires timer to timeout datagram socket Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-09-25 22:50 +0200
csiph-web