[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0905262233560.1762@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 22:39:42 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@...il.com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Victor <linux@...im.org.za>,
Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Support current clocksource handling in fallback
sched_clock().
On Tue, 26 May 2009, john stultz wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 16:38 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Added the generic clock and timer folks to CC.
> >
> > On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 16:31 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > 2009/5/26 Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>:
> > >
> > > > */
> > > > unsigned long long __attribute__((weak)) sched_clock(void)
> > > > {
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * Use the current clocksource when it becomes available later in
> > > > + * the boot process, and ensure that it has a high enough rating
> > > > + * to make it suitable for general use.
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (clock && clock->rating >= 100)
> > > > + return cyc2ns(clock, clocksource_read(clock));
>
> I'm not super familiar with the recent sched_clock changes, but how will
> this work if the clocksource wraps (ACPI PM wraps every 2-5 seconds).
You don't want to use ACPI PM for sched_clock, never ever.
> Also there's no locking here, so the clocksource could change under you.
>
> Further, checking for rating being greater then 100 really doesn't mean
> anything. Probably need to check if the clocksource is continuous
> instead.
I'd like to have an explicit flag for this, so we can avoid that stuff
like pmtimer and other slow access clock sources are used.
> Overall, I'd probably suggest thinking this through a bit more. At some
> point doing this right will cause sched_clock() to be basically the same
> as ktime_get(). So why not just use that instead of remaking it?
ktime_get() involves xtime lock and the scheduler does not care about
a slightly wrong value. sched_clock does not have the accuracy
requirements of time keeping,
If we have an explicit flag we can replace lots of arch/embedded
sched_clock implementations with a generic one which is a Good Thing.
There is a world beside the broken x86 timers :)
Thanks,
tglx
--
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