[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1173821224.1416.24.camel@dwalker1>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 14:27:04 -0700
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
cpufreq@...ts.linux.org.uk,
Virtualization Mailing List <virtualization@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Stolen and degraded time and schedulers
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 13:32 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Most of the existing clocksource infrastructure would only operate on
> CLOCK_TIMEBASE_REALTIME clocksources, so I'm not sure how much overlap
> there would be here. In the case of dealing with cpufreq, there's a
> certain appeal to manipulating the shift/mult parameters to reflect the
> fractional speed of a cpu as it changes.
The frequency tracking you mention is done to some extent inside the
timekeeping adjustment functions, but I'm not sure it's totally accurate
for non-timekeeping, and it also tracks things like interrupt latency.
Tracking frequency changes where it's important to get it right
shouldn't be done I think ..
If you want accurate time accounting, don't use the TSC .
> sched_clock would definitely be the interface which exposes all this
> stuff to the rest of the kernel. After all, its basically a very simple
> interface, though the backend implementation details may not be.
The sched_clock interface is basically a stripped down clocksource..
I've implemented sched_clock as a clocksource in the past ..
> We currently have a sched_clock interface in paravirt_ops to deal with
> the hypervisor aspect. It only occurred to me this morning that cpufreq
> presents exactly the same problem to the rest of the kernel, and so
> there's room for a more general solution.
Are there other architecture which have this per-cpu clock frequency
changing issue? I worked with several other architectures beyond just
x86 and haven't seen this issue ..
Daniel
-
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