[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200704020809.42373.ak@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 08:09:42 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
virtualization@...ts.osdl.org, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>,
Dan Hecht <dhecht@...are.com>,
john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 17/17] Add a sched_clock paravirt_op
On Monday 02 April 2007 07:57, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> The tsc-based get_scheduled_cycles interface is not a good match for
> Xen's runstate accounting, which reports everything in nanoseconds.
>
> This patch replaces this interface with a sched_clock interface, which
> matches both Xen and VMI's requirements.
>
> In order to do this, we:
> 1. replace get_scheduled_cycles with sched_clock
> 2. hoist cycles_2_ns into a common header
> 3. update vmi accordingly
>
> One thing to note: because sched_clock is implemented as a weak
> function in kernel/sched.c, we must define a real function in order to
> override this weak binding. This means the usual paravirt_ops
> technique of using an inline function won't work in this case.
I think it would be much cleaner if you didn't implement your own sched_clock,
but you adjust ns_base/last_tsc to account for your lost cycles.
This could be done cleanly by adding a new function to sched-clock.c
Possibly such a function could be used by other parts of the kernel
in the future too.
-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