From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Is the clockevent resolution fine-grained enough?
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 09:54:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1172912070.24738.99.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3k5xzy2w3.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 09:24 -0800, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > That's an academic exercise, or are you talking about some real world
> > hardware which runs Linux ?
>
> Real hardware running linux.
quantum computer ?
> > > In our application, we need periodic clock interrupts at about 100
> > > kHz.
> >
> > With a stock kernel ?
>
> Well, with a "clockevent" patch of our own. We'd like to use a stock
> kernel, though.
100khz on a stock kernel with real world hardware:
ROTFL, You made my day.
> > > If the (programmable) frequency must be rounded to the nearest
> > > nanosecond, we have a cumulative error of
> > >
> > > 100,000 * 0.5 ns/s = 50 µs/s
> >
> > clockevents is based on the monotonic system clock and depends on the
> > accuracy of that and the device which deliveres the interrupts.
> > [...]
> > There is nothing to nugde. The clockevent subsystem operates on
> > absolute time, so there is no cummulative error, except you setup your
> > timers relative per event.
>
> I'm afraid you didn't quite understand what I was getting at. Say the
> user programs the frequency to be 109,000 Hz. That means a nominal clock
> interval of ~9174.3119 ns. Now the clockevent interface forces me to
> round it down to 9174 ns. That means the clock interrupts fall behind
> with respect to the other parts in the system that implement 109,000 Hz
> much more to the letter. The error grows by 34 µs every second so that
> after 8 hours, we are lagging by a whole second.
Sorry man. Did you actually read what I wrote ?
> The clockevent subsystem operates on absolute time, so there is no
> cummulative error
Again: clockevents operate on absolute time, so it is simply the fault
of the user, when he decides to do something stupid like:
femto_seconds_t interval;
timer_function()
{
do_whatever_you_need_to_do();
set_next_event(interval, RELATIVE);
}
instead of
yokto_seconds_t interval;
yokto_seconds_t next_event;
timer_function()
{
do_whatever_you_need_to_do();
next_event += interval;
set_next_event(yokto_seconds_to_nsec(next_event), ABSOLUTE);
}
Please read _AND_ understand the clockevents code. Your uber_clockevents
patch is solving PEBKAC.
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-03 8:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-02 2:34 Marko Rauhamaa
2007-03-02 16:05 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-03-02 17:24 ` Marko Rauhamaa
2007-03-02 21:04 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2007-03-03 8:54 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2007-03-04 2:46 ` Marko Rauhamaa
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=1172912070.24738.99.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marko@pacujo.net \
/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®