From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos@serpentine.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
vojtech@suse.cz, discuss@x86-64.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] New x86_64 time code for 2.5.70
Date: 11 Jun 2003 14:41:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1055367690.18644.69.camel@w-jstultz2.beaverton.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1055367412.17154.100.camel@serpentine.internal.keyresearch.com>
On Wed, 2003-06-11 at 14:36, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-06-11 at 14:23, john stultz wrote:
>
> > Hmmm. Thats likely part to blame for the lost-ticks code not working. I
> > believe tick_usec is calculated USER_HZ rather then HZ, so you'll be off
> > by an order of magnitude. I ran into the exact same problem.
>
> Unlikely. On my systems, the offset values are off by three orders of
> magnitude, and are always negative. There's a more basic error
> somewhere before that test.
Ok, that was just the first thing I noticed. Let me dig in and see what
I can find.
> The actual impact of lost jiffies is pretty low, though. I've beaten
> vigorously on my systems with the time patch, and they don't lose timer
> interrupts.
Hmm. In my (very quick) testing I'm seeing very frequent 10,000us
inconsistencies. This is w/ and w/o the vsyscall code enabled, so I'm
not sure whats causing it yet. I'll let you know if I trip over
anything.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-06-11 21:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-06-11 18:50 Bryan O'Sullivan
2003-06-11 19:18 ` Andi Kleen
2003-06-11 19:56 ` Bryan O'Sullivan
2003-06-11 20:10 ` Bryan O'Sullivan
2003-06-11 21:23 ` john stultz
2003-06-11 21:36 ` Bryan O'Sullivan
2003-06-11 21:41 ` john stultz [this message]
2003-06-12 0:33 ` john stultz
2003-06-12 6:40 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2003-06-12 17:47 ` Bryan O'Sullivan
2003-06-12 19:39 ` john stultz
2003-06-12 19:55 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2003-06-12 21:16 ` Bryan O'Sullivan
2003-06-13 1:43 ` john stultz
2003-06-12 19:48 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2003-06-11 20:41 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2003-06-11 20:44 ` john stultz
2003-06-11 21:32 ` Mika Penttilä
2003-06-11 21:28 ` Bryan O'Sullivan
2003-06-12 4:40 ` [discuss] " Andreas Jaeger
2003-06-12 6:42 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2003-06-12 6:47 ` Vojtech Pavlik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1055367690.18644.69.camel@w-jstultz2.beaverton.ibm.com \
--to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=bos@serpentine.com \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vojtech@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®