Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names

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:
> > On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 02:28:45PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:09:31PM +0200, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 10:48:50AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 10:43:44PM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > > > On Saturday 05 August 2006 23:16, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > > > > This whole thing is broken, e.g. on a preemptive kernel when the
> > > > > > > code can switch CPUs 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Would not preempt_disable fix that?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Partially, but you still have other problems. Please just get rid
> > > > > of it. Why do we have timer code in the kernel if you then chose
> > > > > not to use it?
> > > >  
> > > > The problem is that gettimeofday() is not always fast. 
> > > 
> > > When it is not fast that means it is not reliable and then you're
> > > also not well off using it anyways.
> > 
> > I assume you wanted to say "When gettimeofday() is slow, it means TSC is
> > not reliable", which I agree with. 
> > 
> > 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.

That would help.

> However it would be some work to implement it for all architectures.
> 
> > I assume we could make it work with the monotonic timer instead. 
> 
> The monotonic timer is the right thing to use to make you independent
> of ntpd, but it's normally not faster or slower than gettimeofday.
 
Yup.

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
Director SuSE Labs
-
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/

---

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
    • From: Rusty Russell <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
    • From: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
    • From: Vojtech Pavlik <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
    • From: Vojtech Pavlik <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
    • From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [PATCH] Remove redundant cleanup_srcu_struct() declaration
• Next by Date: 2.6.17.7-grsec x86_64 pdflush killed
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Turn rdmsr, rdtsc into inline functions, clarify names
• 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]