Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.36 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.36;
From:   Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
To:     Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
Cc:     Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        John Stultz <jstultz@google.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@suse.cz>,
        Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>,
        "Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@intel.com>,
        K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/32] timers: Fix nextevt calculation when no timers
 are pending
In-Reply-To: <ZXUHu6Xqdg8NNcPC@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20231201092654.34614-1-anna-maria@linutronix.de>
 <20231201092654.34614-13-anna-maria@linutronix.de>
 <20231204160350.OTCnqCJf@linutronix.de> <87zfyodfxc.fsf@somnus>
 <ZXUHu6Xqdg8NNcPC@localhost.localdomain>
Date:   Tue, 12 Dec 2023 14:21:25 +0100
Message-ID: <875y13mu96.fsf@somnus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> writes:

> Le Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 12:53:03PM +0100, Anna-Maria Behnsen a =C3=A9crit=
 :
>>=20
>> Frederic, what do you think?
>
> So it looks like is_idle must be fixed.
>
> As for the timer softirq, ->next_expiry is already unreliable because when
> a timer is removed, ->next_expiry is not updated (even though that removed
> timer might have been the earliest). So ->next_expiry can already carry a
> "too early" value. The only constraint is that ->next_expiry can't be lat=
er
> than the first timer.
>
> So I'd rather put a comment somewhere about the fact that wrapping is exp=
ected
> to behave ok. But it's your call.

Ok. If both solutions are fine, I would like to take the solution with
updating the next_expiry values for empty bases. It will make the
compare of expiry values of global and local timer base easier in one of
the patches later on.

Thanks,

	Anna-Maria