Skip to content

kernel: fix k_sleep in no multi-threading mode #80979

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
nashif merged 1 commit into from
Nov 16, 2024
Merged

kernel: fix k_sleep in no multi-threading mode #80979

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
16 changes: 12 additions & 4 deletions kernel/nothread.c
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ bool k_is_in_isr(void)
int32_t z_impl_k_sleep(k_timeout_t timeout)
{
k_ticks_t ticks;
uint32_t expected_wakeup_ticks;
uint32_t ticks_to_wait;

__ASSERT(!arch_is_in_isr(), "");

Expand All @@ -37,12 +37,20 @@ int32_t z_impl_k_sleep(k_timeout_t timeout)

ticks = timeout.ticks;
if (Z_TICK_ABS(ticks) <= 0) {
expected_wakeup_ticks = ticks + sys_clock_tick_get_32();
/* ticks is delta timeout */
ticks_to_wait = ticks;
} else {
expected_wakeup_ticks = Z_TICK_ABS(ticks);
/* ticks is absolute timeout expiration */
uint32_t curr_ticks = sys_clock_tick_get_32();

if (Z_TICK_ABS(ticks) > curr_ticks) {
ticks_to_wait = Z_TICK_ABS(ticks) - curr_ticks;
Copy link
Contributor

@rruuaanng rruuaanng Nov 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are they possible to be negative number?

(Just a question.)

Copy link
Author

@KushnerovMikhail KushnerovMikhail Nov 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not really understand question.

If you talking about Z_TICK_ABS(ticks), than it can. But negative values are caught by previous if.
If you talking about ticks_to_wait, I think there is no meaning in waiting negative time. So, I make it unsigned.
sys_clock_tick_get_32(), of course, can not be negative.

} else {
ticks_to_wait = 0;
}
}
/* busy wait to be time coherent since subsystems may depend on it */
z_impl_k_busy_wait(k_ticks_to_us_ceil32(expected_wakeup_ticks));
z_impl_k_busy_wait(k_ticks_to_us_ceil32(ticks_to_wait));

int32_t ret = k_ticks_to_ms_ceil64(0);

Expand Down
Loading