search for: update_wall_time

...t offset, tk->cycle_last += interval; tk->xtime_nsec += tk->xtime_interval << shift; - accumulate_nsecs_to_secs(tk); + *action |= accumulate_nsecs_to_secs(tk); /* Accumulate raw time */ raw_nsecs = (u64)tk->raw_interval << shift; @@ -1369,7 +1369,7 @@ static void update_wall_time(void) struct timekeeper *tk = &shadow_timekeeper; cycle_t offset; int shift = 0, maxshift; - unsigned int action; + unsigned int action = 0; unsigned long flags; raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&timekeeper_lock, flags); @@ -1404,7 +1404,7 @@ static void update_wall_time(void) maxshift =...

Hi Ian/Stefano: I changed over to the PV clock for hybrid liked we talked at the hackathon. I still have the hang in update_wall_time() after dom0 switches to xen as clocksource. The source of hang seems to be in xen stime_local_stamp in cpu_time that suddenly jumps to a large 64bit value. I''ve been chasing to figure where that happens, and why for the hybrid and not PV. It appears the source of jump is time_calibration...

...t offset, tk->cycle_last += interval; tk->xtime_nsec += tk->xtime_interval << shift; - accumulate_nsecs_to_secs(tk); + *action |= accumulate_nsecs_to_secs(tk); /* Accumulate raw time */ raw_nsecs = (u64)tk->raw_interval << shift; @@ -1367,7 +1367,7 @@ static void update_wall_time(void) struct timekeeper *tk = &shadow_timekeeper; cycle_t offset; int shift = 0, maxshift; - unsigned int action; + unsigned int action = 0; unsigned long flags; raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&timekeeper_lock, flags); @@ -1402,7 +1402,7 @@ static void update_wall_time(void) maxshift =...

...1:33:15 asc_server kernel: 00000283 c0132a20 c5fe6220 00000010 00000202 00000000 00000000 c02a25a0 Aug 16 11:33:15 asc_server kernel: Call Trace: [common_interrupt+24/32] [clear_inode+111/132] [clear_inode+0/132] [dispose_list+28/88] [try_to_free_inodes+204/260] [try_to_free_inodes+223/260] [update_wall_time+18/72] Aug 16 11:33:15 asc_server kernel: [cprt+9024/38422] [grow_inodes+32/428] [get_new_inode+197/304] [iget+103/116] [ext2_lookup+90/140] [real_lookup+91/180] [do_select+487/512] [lookup_dentry+304/504] Aug 16 11:33:15 asc_server kernel: [getname+95/156] [__namei+49/104] [sys_newst...

From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com> The high resolution timer code gets notified of step changes to the system time with clock_was_set() or clock_was_set_delayed() calls. If other parts of the kernel require similar notification there is no clear place to hook into. Add a clock_was_set atomic notifier chain (clock_was_set_notifier_list) and call this in place of clock_was_set().

Hi all, I have 5 CentOS 7 virtual guests installed (all fully patched to latest release) and i have the following error in all of them: systemd-journald[7779]: File /run/log/journal/b4a41f4214ca44f898638301891a6f2e/system.journal corrupted or uncleanly shut down, renaming and replacing. ?? .. And I don't understand why. I have configured "Storage=volatile" in journald.conf ...

...lock->cycle_last = cycle_now; tk->ntp_error = 0; timekeeping_suspended = 0; - timekeeping_update(tk, false, true); + timekeeping_update(tk, TK_MIRROR); write_seqcount_end(&timekeeper_seq); raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&timekeeper_lock, flags); @@ -1415,7 +1418,7 @@ static void update_wall_time(void) * updating. */ memcpy(real_tk, tk, sizeof(*tk)); - timekeeping_update(real_tk, false, false); + timekeeping_update(real_tk, 0); write_seqcount_end(&timekeeper_seq); out: raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&timekeeper_lock, flags); -- 1.7.2.5

...max", Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/kernel/timer.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/kernel/timer.c 2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800 +++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/kernel/timer.c 2006-03-12 19:57:53.000000000 -0800 @@ -823,6 +823,17 @@ static void update_wall_time(unsigned lo } while (ticks); } +static inline void after_process_times_updated(int user_tick, struct task_struct *p) +{ + int cpu = smp_processor_id(); + + run_local_timers(); + if (rcu_pending(cpu)) + rcu_check_callbacks(cpu, user_tick); + scheduler_tick(); + run_posix_cpu_timers(p); +} +...

...max", Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/kernel/timer.c =================================================================== --- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/kernel/timer.c 2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800 +++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/kernel/timer.c 2006-03-12 19:57:53.000000000 -0800 @@ -823,6 +823,17 @@ static void update_wall_time(unsigned lo } while (ticks); } +static inline void after_process_times_updated(int user_tick, struct task_struct *p) +{ + int cpu = smp_processor_id(); + + run_local_timers(); + if (rcu_pending(cpu)) + rcu_check_callbacks(cpu, user_tick); + scheduler_tick(); + run_posix_cpu_timers(p); +} +...

(Moving from offlist discussion.) I''m interested in opinions... Assume there are four single vcpu domains A, B, C, D, running on a 2-CPU physical machine. We wish to test for time skew on domain A. Assuming B, C, and D are all running some workload that attempts to fully saturate the (single) cpu. 1) Should the affect on domain A be essentially the same regardless of what load