From: Andreas Mohr <andi@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
Cc: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@insightbb.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 17:19:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060807151957.GA9911@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060807125639.GA88155@muc.de>
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 02:56:39PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 02:48:55PM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> > But I need, in the driver, in the no-TSC case use i/o counting, not a
> > slow but reliable method. And I can't say, from outside the timing
> > subsystem, whether gettimeofday() is fast or slow.
>
> Hmm if that is the only obstacle I can export a "slow gettimeofday" flag.
Wouldn't it be much more useful to normalize this versus (e.g.) CPU cycles
for much more information than a plain "this is fast/this is slow" flag,
to be measured on bootup?
That way a driver could use
if (gtod_cpu_cycles_needed <= 500)
gettimeofday();
else
funky_fast_workaround();
OK, in total we have at least four ways of doing this:
a) gtod_is_slow flag
b) number of CPU cycles needed
c) number of nanoseconds needed (but this is less useful since it doesn't
properly take into account the fast vs. slow CPUs behaviour, I think)
d) providing all three items above together, for optimal flexibility??
This is somewhat related to an idea of mine which would be to benchmark all
clock sources on bootup and print a timing summary, optionally warning
users if grave performance issues have been found with a specific source
(and especially if that one is active!).
Additionally, print timing summary of gettimeofday() itself on bootup?
Andreas Mohr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-07 15:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1154771262.28257.38.camel@localhost.localdomain>
2006-08-06 2:38 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-06 2:56 ` Rusty Russell
2006-08-06 2:58 ` H. Peter Anvin
2006-08-06 3:09 ` Rusty Russell
2006-08-06 3:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2006-08-06 3:49 ` Rusty Russell
2006-08-06 3:16 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-06 3:52 ` Rusty Russell
2006-08-06 14:58 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-07 2:43 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-08-07 8:48 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-07 11:09 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2006-08-07 12:28 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-07 12:48 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2006-08-07 12:56 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-07 13:18 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2006-08-07 13:32 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-08-07 15:01 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-07 15:19 ` Andreas Mohr [this message]
2006-08-07 15:57 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-07 16:04 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2006-08-07 16:12 ` Andi Kleen
2006-08-07 19:22 ` Vojtech Pavlik
2006-08-14 20:13 ` Pavel Machek
2006-08-07 11:07 ` 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=20060807151957.GA9911@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de \
--to=andi@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=dtor@insightbb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--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®