Re: [PATCH next] softirq: enable MAX_SOFTIRQ_TIME tuning with sysctl max_softirq_time_usecs
From: Zhiqiang Liu <hidden>
Date: 2019-07-09 01:26:20
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, lkml
From: Zhiqiang Liu <hidden>
Date: 2019-07-09 01:26:20
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, lkml
On 2019/7/8 22:14, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Zhiqiang,quoted
If HZ satisfies the condition: HZ <= MSEC_PER_SEC && !(MSEC_PER_SEC % HZ), the return value of _msecs_to_jiffies func with m=0 is different with different HZ setting.quoted
------------------------------------ | HZ | MSEC_PER_SEC / HZ | return | ------------------------------------ |1000| 1 | 0 | |500 | 2 | 1 | |200 | 5 | 1 | |100 | 10 | 1 | ------------------------------------ Why only the return value of HZ=1000 is equal to 0 with m=0 ?I don't know how you tested that, but obviously all four HZ values use this variant:quoted
#if HZ <= MSEC_PER_SEC && !(MSEC_PER_SEC % HZ) static inline unsigned long _msecs_to_jiffies(const unsigned int m) { return (m + (MSEC_PER_SEC / HZ) - 1) / (MSEC_PER_SEC / HZ); }and for all four HZ values the result is 0. Why? For m = 0 the calculation reduces to: ((MSEC_PER_SEC / HZ) - 1) / (MSEC_PER_SEC / HZ) i.e. (x - 1) / x where x = [1, 2, 5, 10] which is guaranteed to be 0 for integer math. If not, you have a compiler problem. Thanks, tglx
Thanks for your reply. Actually, I have made a low-level mistake. I am really sorry for that. Thanks again.