[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AE7DC04.7080706@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 07:52:04 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
kurt.hackel@...cle.com, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@...citrix.com>, zach.brown@...cle.com,
chris.mason@...cle.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/pvclock: add vsyscall implementation
On 10/27/2009 08:20 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 10/27/09 10:29, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>
>> Is there any way for an application to conclusively determine
>> programmatically if the "fast vsyscall" pvclock is functional
>> vs the much much slower gettimeofday/clock_gettime equivalents?
>>
>> If not, might it be possible to implement some (sysfs?)
>> way to determine this, that would also be backwards compatible
>> to existing OS's that don't have pvclock+vsyscall supported?
>>
>>
> It would probably be simplest and most portable for the app to just
> measure the performance of gettimeofday and see if it meets its needs.
>
How can you reliably measure performance in a virtualized environment?
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
--
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