mirror of
https://github.com/hardkernel/linux.git
synced 2026-06-05 02:21:52 +09:00
aaf6ccb6f3
commitf7abf14f00upstream. For some unknown reason the introduction of the timer_wait_running callback missed to fixup posix CPU timers, which went unnoticed for almost four years. Marco reported recently that the WARN_ON() in timer_wait_running() triggers with a posix CPU timer test case. Posix CPU timers have two execution models for expiring timers depending on CONFIG_POSIX_CPU_TIMERS_TASK_WORK: 1) If not enabled, the expiry happens in hard interrupt context so spin waiting on the remote CPU is reasonably time bound. Implement an empty stub function for that case. 2) If enabled, the expiry happens in task work before returning to user space or guest mode. The expired timers are marked as firing and moved from the timer queue to a local list head with sighand lock held. Once the timers are moved, sighand lock is dropped and the expiry happens in fully preemptible context. That means the expiring task can be scheduled out, migrated, interrupted etc. So spin waiting on it is more than suboptimal. The timer wheel has a timer_wait_running() mechanism for RT, which uses a per CPU timer-base expiry lock which is held by the expiry code and the task waiting for the timer function to complete blocks on that lock. This does not work in the same way for posix CPU timers as there is no timer base and expiry for process wide timers can run on any task belonging to that process, but the concept of waiting on an expiry lock can be used too in a slightly different way: - Add a mutex to struct posix_cputimers_work. This struct is per task and used to schedule the expiry task work from the timer interrupt. - Add a task_struct pointer to struct cpu_timer which is used to store a the task which runs the expiry. That's filled in when the task moves the expired timers to the local expiry list. That's not affecting the size of the k_itimer union as there are bigger union members already - Let the task take the expiry mutex around the expiry function - Let the waiter acquire a task reference with rcu_read_lock() held and block on the expiry mutex This avoids spin-waiting on a task which might not even be on a CPU and works nicely for RT too. Fixes:ec8f954a40("posix-timers: Use a callback for cancel synchronization on PREEMPT_RT") Reported-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com> Change-Id: Ic069585c15bc968dec3c2b99cc70256f56a70b32 Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Tested-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com> Tested-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/87zg764ojw.ffs@tglx Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> (cherry picked from commitbccf9fe296) Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@google.com>
How do I submit patches to Android Common Kernels
-
BEST: Make all of your changes to upstream Linux. If appropriate, backport to the stable releases. These patches will be merged automatically in the corresponding common kernels. If the patch is already in upstream Linux, post a backport of the patch that conforms to the patch requirements below.
- Do not send patches upstream that contain only symbol exports. To be considered for upstream Linux,
additions of
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()require an in-tree modular driver that uses the symbol -- so include the new driver or changes to an existing driver in the same patchset as the export. - When sending patches upstream, the commit message must contain a clear case for why the patch is needed and beneficial to the community. Enabling out-of-tree drivers or functionality is not not a persuasive case.
- Do not send patches upstream that contain only symbol exports. To be considered for upstream Linux,
additions of
-
LESS GOOD: Develop your patches out-of-tree (from an upstream Linux point-of-view). Unless these are fixing an Android-specific bug, these are very unlikely to be accepted unless they have been coordinated with kernel-team@android.com. If you want to proceed, post a patch that conforms to the patch requirements below.
Common Kernel patch requirements
- All patches must conform to the Linux kernel coding standards and pass
scripts/checkpatch.pl - Patches shall not break gki_defconfig or allmodconfig builds for arm, arm64, x86, x86_64 architectures (see https://source.android.com/setup/build/building-kernels)
- If the patch is not merged from an upstream branch, the subject must be tagged with the type of patch:
UPSTREAM:,BACKPORT:,FROMGIT:,FROMLIST:, orANDROID:. - All patches must have a
Change-Id:tag (see https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/user-changeid.html) - If an Android bug has been assigned, there must be a
Bug:tag. - All patches must have a
Signed-off-by:tag by the author and the submitter
Additional requirements are listed below based on patch type
Requirements for backports from mainline Linux: UPSTREAM:, BACKPORT:
- If the patch is a cherry-pick from Linux mainline with no changes at all
- tag the patch subject with
UPSTREAM:. - add upstream commit information with a
(cherry picked from commit ...)line - Example:
- if the upstream commit message is
- tag the patch subject with
important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
- then Joe Smith would upload the patch for the common kernel as
UPSTREAM: important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
Bug: 135791357
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
(cherry picked from commit c31e73121f4c1ec41143423ac6ce3ce6dafdcec1)
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
- If the patch requires any changes from the upstream version, tag the patch with
BACKPORT:instead ofUPSTREAM:.- use the same tags as
UPSTREAM: - add comments about the changes under the
(cherry picked from commit ...)line - Example:
- use the same tags as
BACKPORT: important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
Bug: 135791357
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
(cherry picked from commit c31e73121f4c1ec41143423ac6ce3ce6dafdcec1)
[joe: Resolved minor conflict in drivers/foo/bar.c ]
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
Requirements for other backports: FROMGIT:, FROMLIST:,
- If the patch has been merged into an upstream maintainer tree, but has not yet
been merged into Linux mainline
- tag the patch subject with
FROMGIT: - add info on where the patch came from as
(cherry picked from commit <sha1> <repo> <branch>). This must be a stable maintainer branch (not rebased, so don't uselinux-nextfor example). - if changes were required, use
BACKPORT: FROMGIT: - Example:
- if the commit message in the maintainer tree is
- tag the patch subject with
important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
- then Joe Smith would upload the patch for the common kernel as
FROMGIT: important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
Bug: 135791357
(cherry picked from commit 878a2fd9de10b03d11d2f622250285c7e63deace
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/foo/bar.git test-branch)
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
- If the patch has been submitted to LKML, but not accepted into any maintainer tree
- tag the patch subject with
FROMLIST: - add a
Link:tag with a link to the submittal on lore.kernel.org - add a
Bug:tag with the Android bug (required for patches not accepted into a maintainer tree) - if changes were required, use
BACKPORT: FROMLIST: - Example:
- tag the patch subject with
FROMLIST: important patch from upstream
This is the detailed description of the important patch
Signed-off-by: Fred Jones <fred.jones@foo.org>
Bug: 135791357
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190619171517.GA17557@someone.com/
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
Requirements for Android-specific patches: ANDROID:
- If the patch is fixing a bug to Android-specific code
- tag the patch subject with
ANDROID: - add a
Fixes:tag that cites the patch with the bug - Example:
- tag the patch subject with
ANDROID: fix android-specific bug in foobar.c
This is the detailed description of the important fix
Fixes: 1234abcd2468 ("foobar: add cool feature")
Change-Id: I4caaaa566ea080fa148c5e768bb1a0b6f7201c01
Signed-off-by: Joe Smith <joe.smith@foo.org>
- If the patch is a new feature
- tag the patch subject with
ANDROID: - add a
Bug:tag with the Android bug (required for android-specific features)
- tag the patch subject with