Re: sched_clock -> check_tsc_unstable -> tsc_read_c3_time ?!?

On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 13:11 -0700, john stultz wrote:
> Yea, you're right about the inlining. Although I'm not sure why those
> functions should take microseconds to execute. That's very strange. 

Latency tracing overhead plus a slow (600MHz) machine?

Lee

-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: sched_clock -> check_tsc_unstable -> tsc_read_c3_time ?!?
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• References:
  • sched_clock -> check_tsc_unstable -> tsc_read_c3_time ?!?
    • From: Lee Revell <[email protected]>
  • Re: sched_clock -> check_tsc_unstable -> tsc_read_c3_time ?!?
    • From: john stultz <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 09/14] Big kfree NULL check cleanup - misc remaining drivers
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Dallas's 1-wire bus compile error (again)
• Previous by thread: Re: sched_clock -> check_tsc_unstable -> tsc_read_c3_time ?!?
• Next by thread: Re: sched_clock -> check_tsc_unstable -> tsc_read_c3_time ?!?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]