* Steven Rostedt ([email protected]) wrote:
>
> On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> >
> > Just as a detail : LTTng traces NMI, which can happen on top of a
> > xtime_lock. So yes, I have to consider the impact of this kind of lock when I
> > choose my time source, which is currently a per architecture TSC read,
> > or a read of the jiffies counter when the architecture does not have a
> > synchronised TSC over the CPUs. This is abstracted in include/asm-*/ltt.h.
> >
>
> I'm curious. How do you show the interactions between two CPUs when the
> TSC isn't in sync? Using jiffies is not fast enough to know the order of
> events that happen within usecs.
>
I shift the jiffies and OR that with a logical clock which increments atomically
and is shared across the CPUs. It is slow and ugly, but it works. :)
Mathieu
> -- Steve
>
>
> > I know it doesn't support dynamic ticks, I'm working on using the HRtimers
> > instead, but I must make sure that the seqlock read will fail if it nests over
> > a write seqlock.
> >
> > MAthieu
> >
> > OpenPGP public key: http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
> > Key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
> >
OpenPGP public key: http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
Key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
