On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 04:14:44PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> This looks incorrect. If the watchdog period is odd you're truncating
> the timeout by one second.
It is, but I (carelessly) looked over this detail.
> If you convert to milliseconds it's fine to divide by 2, so I suggest
> you do that.
This is much better, thanks.
> Of course, there's still an overflow problem here that we ought to
> check for at sysctl(2) time. But that was here before and I only just
> noticed it, so, one issue at a time.
Yes, there are various issues with sysctl passing invalid input.
Another story.
OK?
Index: kern_watchdog.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/kern/kern_watchdog.c,v
retrieving revision 1.13
diff -u -p -r1.13 kern_watchdog.c
--- kern_watchdog.c 9 Jan 2017 17:58:44 -0000 1.13
+++ kern_watchdog.c 5 Jul 2019 21:48:29 -0000
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ wdog_tickle(void *arg)
if (wdog_ctl_cb == NULL)
return;
(void) (*wdog_ctl_cb)(wdog_ctl_cb_arg, wdog_period);
- timeout_add(&wdog_timeout, wdog_period * hz / 2);
+ timeout_add_msec(&wdog_timeout, wdog_period * 1000 / 2);
}
void
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ sysctl_wdog(int *name, u_int namelen, vo
if (wdog_auto && wdog_period > 0) {
(void) (*wdog_ctl_cb)(wdog_ctl_cb_arg, wdog_period);
- timeout_add(&wdog_timeout, wdog_period * hz / 2);
+ timeout_add_msec(&wdog_timeout, wdog_period * 1000 / 2);
} else
timeout_del(&wdog_timeout);
