[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cfd18e0f0806250633j2901aa89u5609f1b9a4a37dc6@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:33:55 +0200
From: "Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com>
To: "Bart Van Assche" <bart.vanassche@...il.com>
Cc: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Roman Zippel" <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
"john stultz" <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: When did High-Resolution Timers hit mainline?
Hi Bart,
Just following up a little further here.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Bart Van Assche
<bart.vanassche@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 6:08 AM, Michael Kerrisk
> <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com> wrote:
>> The Software Clock, HZ, and Jiffies
>> The accuracy of various system calls that set timeouts, (e.g.,
>> select(2), sigtimedwait(2)) and measure CPU time (e.g.,
>> getrusage(2)) is limited by the resolution of the software
>> clock, a clock maintained by the kernel which measures time in
>> jiffies. The size of a jiffy is determined by the value of the
>> kernel constant HZ.
>
> Maybe "size of a jiffy" should be replaced by "duration of a jiffy" ?
>
> An explanation of the impact of CONFIG_NO_HZ is missing.
>
> You also missed the fact that since the 2.6 kernel there are two
> constants related to time resolution, namely HZ and USER_HZ. HZ is the
> frequency of the timer interrupt, and 1/USER_HZ is the time resolution
> for system calls that use jiffies as time unit (e.g. the five values
> returned by the times() system call).
As far as I can tell, times() is the only system call that employs
USER_HZ. Let me know if you think I'm wrong. The only othe place
where USER_HZ seems to come into play is the time fields displayed in
/proc/PID/stat and /poc/stat. (My point of verification here is
looking at usages of cputime_to_clock_t() and cputime64_to_clock_t()
in the kernel source.)
> The time resolution of e.g. the
> select() and poll() system calls is 1.0/HZ since the timeout for these
> system calls is specified as a struct timeval or struct timespec.
Yes. So I think what I'll do is just add some text noting that the
times() syscall is a special case.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html
Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html
--
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