From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: Shailabh Nagar <nagar@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
elsa-devel <elsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net,
ckrm-tech <ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Guillaume Thouvenin <guillaume.thouvenin@bull.net>,
Jay Lan <jlan@sgi.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][Patch 1/5] nanosecond timestamps and diffs
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:49:22 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1134416962.14627.7.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <439DD01A.2060803@watson.ibm.com>
On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 19:31 +0000, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> >
> >
> >>+void getnstimestamp(struct timespec *ts)
> >
> >
> > There is already getnstimeofday in the kernel.
> >
>
> Yes, and that function is being used within the getnstimestamp() being proposed.
> However, John Stultz had advised that getnstimeofday could get affected by calls to
> settimeofday and had recommended adjusting the getnstimeofday value with wall_to_monotonic.
>
> John, could you elaborate ?
I think you pretty well have it covered.
getnstimeofday + wall_to_monotonic should be higher-res and more
reliable (then TSC based sched_clock(), for example) for getting a
timestamp.
There may be performance concerns as you have to access the clock
hardware in getnstimeofday(), but there really is no other way for
reliable finely grained monotonically increasing timestamps.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-12 19:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-07 22:08 [RFC][Patch 0/5] Per-task delay accounting Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:13 ` [RFC][Patch 1/5] nanosecond timestamps and diffs Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-12 18:50 ` [Lse-tech] " Christoph Lameter
2005-12-12 19:31 ` Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-12 19:49 ` john stultz [this message]
2005-12-12 20:00 ` Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-12 20:07 ` john stultz
2005-12-13 0:54 ` George Anzinger
2005-12-13 3:48 ` Nish Aravamudan
2005-12-13 18:35 ` Jay Lan
2005-12-13 21:16 ` john stultz
2005-12-13 21:44 ` Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-13 22:13 ` George Anzinger
2005-12-13 23:05 ` [ckrm-tech] " Matt Helsley
2005-12-07 22:15 ` [RFC][Patch 2/5] Per-task delay accounting: Initialization, dynamic turn on/off Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:23 ` [RFC][Patch 3/5] Per-task delay accounting: Sync block I/O delays Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:33 ` [ckrm-tech] " Dave Hansen
2005-12-07 23:06 ` Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:28 ` [RFC][Patch 4/5] Per-task delay accounting: Swap in delays Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:29 ` [RFC][Patch 5/5] Per-task delay accounting: procfs interface Shailabh Nagar
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=1134416962.14627.7.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com \
--to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=elsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=guillaume.thouvenin@bull.net \
--cc=jlan@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=nagar@watson.ibm.com \
/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®