On 10/14/16 14:45, Mike Holmes wrote:
also need to put

I put this link to git log.


Into the patch description, maybe that can happen as it is pushed ?

On 13 October 2016 at 17:46, Bill Fischofer <>

Since this is a bug fix, please open a Bug for it so that this can be
tracked as a defect closure.

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Brian Brooks <>

A timer pool's tick starts at t0 (zero). Once the first period has
the timer pool is scanned for any timers that have expired since t0 + 1.

Current code does an atomic fetch increment on the tick, but uses the
previous tick during timer expiration processing. What is needed is the
previous tick + 1.

The observable effect without this patch is that timers are expired one
period (timer resolution) later than they should be.

Signed-off-by: Brian Brooks <>

Reviewed-by: Bill Fischofer <>

  platform/linux-generic/odp_timer.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/platform/linux-generic/odp_timer.c
index becea9d..b26ac6b 100644
--- a/platform/linux-generic/odp_timer.c
+++ b/platform/linux-generic/odp_timer.c
@@ -691,7 +691,7 @@ static void timer_notify(odp_timer_pool *tp)
         prev_tick = odp_atomic_fetch_inc_u64(&tp->cur_tick);

         /* Scan timer array, looking for timers to expire */
-       (void)odp_timer_pool_expire(tp, prev_tick);
+       (void)odp_timer_pool_expire(tp, prev_tick + 1);

         /* Else skip scan of timers. cur_tick was updated and next itimer
          * invocation will process older expiration ticks as well */

Reply via email to