From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: tony.luck@intel.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jasonuhl@sgi.com
Subject: Re: CONFIG_PRINTK_TIME woes
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 10:50:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050822105053.29667b61.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200508221742.j7MHgMJI020020@agluck-lia64.sc.intel.com>
tony.luck@intel.com wrote:
>
> At the other extreme ... the current use of sched_clock() with
> potentially nano-second resolution is way over the top. Logging
> to a serial console at 115200 a typical line from printk will take
> 2-4 milli-seconds to print ... so there would seem to be little
> benefit from a sub-millisecond resolution (in fact at 250HZ jiffies
> are on the ragged edge of being good enough).
>
> If that isn't sufficient ... it should be possible to make a cut-down,
> lockless version of do_gettimeofday that meets Andrew's suggestion
> of good resolution with occasional theoretical weirdness. But before
> we go there ... I'd like to hear whether there are usage models that
> really need better resolution than jiffies can provide?
I think so. Say you're debugging or performance tuning filesystem requests
and I/O completions, etc. You disable the console with `dmesg -n', run the
test then do `dmesg -s 1000000 > foo'. Having somewhat-sub-millisecond
timestamping in the resulting trace is required.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-08-22 20:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-18 18:47 Luck, Tony
2005-08-21 9:13 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-21 9:16 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-21 9:27 ` Nick Piggin
2005-08-21 9:32 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-21 11:25 ` Nick Piggin
2005-08-21 18:01 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-24 0:04 ` Tim Bird
2005-08-22 17:42 ` tony.luck
2005-08-22 17:50 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2005-08-22 20:52 ` tony.luck
2005-08-22 20:20 ` David S. Miller
2005-08-22 20:33 ` Jason Uhlenkott
2005-08-22 20:42 ` David S. Miller
2005-08-22 21:10 ` tony.luck
2005-08-22 21:15 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-22 22:33 ` tony.luck
2005-08-22 22:38 ` Andrew Morton
2005-08-22 23:27 ` tony.luck
2005-08-23 1:52 ` Paul Mackerras
2005-08-23 15:01 ` Nick Piggin
2005-08-24 0:36 ` Tim Bird
2005-08-23 7:18 ` Tony Lindgren
2005-08-23 14:07 Luck, Tony
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=20050822105053.29667b61.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=jasonuhl@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.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
Powered by JetHome