Arjan van de Ven wrote:
it's the cost of a syscall (1000 cycles?) plus what it takes to get a reasonable time estimate. Assuming your kernel has enough time support AND your tsc is reasonably ok, it'll be using that. If it's NOT using that then that's a pretty good sign that you can't also use it in userspace....
I wrote a quick and dirty program that I've attached to test the cost difference between RDTSC and gettimeofday (gtod), the results: wink@winkc2d1:~/linux/linux-2.6/test/rdtsc-pref$ time ./rdtsc-pref 100000000 rdtsc: average ticks= 65 gtod: average ticks= 222 gtod_us: average ticks= 232 real 0m36.002s user 0m35.997s sys 0m0.000s About a 3.5x cost difference, still for most of my uses gtod was not as costly as I had supposed. But, there are other uses that it wouldn't be acceptable. For instance, I have used a memory mapped time stamp counter in an embedded ARM based system for instrumenting the interrupt service routine, syscalls and task switches. For this type of instrumentation a gtod type call wouldn't have been suitable. Anyway for x86_64 systems, if I can use a memory mapped HPET counter, I might be able to have my cake and eat it too. One counter that can be used inside and outside the kernel that is cheap, precise and accurate, nirvana! We'll have to see. BTW my system is a 2.4ghz Core 2 duo running 2.6.19-rc6 with HPET enabled, in the attachment I've included my config file. Cheers, Wink
Attachment:
rdtsc-pref.tgz
Description: Binary data
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch] x86: unify/rewrite SMP TSC sync code
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] x86: unify/rewrite SMP TSC sync code
- References:
- Re: [patch] x86: unify/rewrite SMP TSC sync code
- From: Robert Hancock <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] x86: unify/rewrite SMP TSC sync code
- From: Wink Saville <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] x86: unify/rewrite SMP TSC sync code
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] x86: unify/rewrite SMP TSC sync code
- Prev by Date: Incorrect handling of descriptors put into UNIX domain sockets?
- Next by Date: Re: BUG? atleast >=2.6.19-rc5, x86 chroot on x86_64| perhaps duplicate bug report?
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch] x86: unify/rewrite SMP TSC sync code
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] x86: unify/rewrite SMP TSC sync code
- Index(es):