[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200610281137.22451.ak@suse.de>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 11:37:22 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Lee Revell <rlrevell@...-job.com>, thockin@...kin.org,
Luca Tettamanti <kronos.it@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: AMD X2 unsynced TSC fix?
On Friday 27 October 2006 22:28, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 11:28:00PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 18:04 -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > I don't think it makes too much sense to hack on pure RDTSC when
> > > gtod is fast enough -- RDTSC will be always icky and hard to use.
> >
> > I agree FWIW, our application would be happy to just use gtod if it
> > wasn't so slow on these machines.
>
> Agreed, I had to turn about 20 dual-core servers to single core because
> the only way to get a monotonic gtod made it so slow that it was not
> worth using a dual-core.
Curious - what workload was that?
While gtod is time critical and often appears high on profile lists it is
normally not as time critical as you're claiming it is; especially not
time critical enough to warrant such radical action.
> I initially considered buying one dual-core
> AMD for my own use, but after seeing this, I'm definitely sure I won't
> ever buy one as long as this problem is not fixed, as it causes too
> many problems.
It's somewhat slower, but I'm not sure what "too many problems" you're
refering to.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists