[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BFB0990.6030400@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 16:19:44 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
CC: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
Brian Bloniarz <bmb@...enacr.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>, chris.mason@...cle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Export tsc related information in sysfs
On 05/24/2010 04:16 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>> From: john stultz [mailto:johnstul@...ibm.com]
>> Also, you don't really need extra accuracy, you just need it to be the
>> same from boot to boot. NTP keeps the correction factor persistent from
>> boot to boot via the drift file. The boot argument is just trying to
>> save the time (possibly hours depending on ntp config) after a reboot
>> for NTP to correct for the new error introduced by calibration.
>
> I was assuming that extra accuracy would decrease the ntp
> convergence time by about the same factor (5-6 bits of extra
> accuracy would decrease ntp convergence time by 32-64x).
> Is that an incorrect assumption?
>
Yes.
>> From: H. Peter Anvin [mailto:hpa@...or.com]
>> A longer sample would make sense if the goal is to freeze it into a
>> kernel command line variable, but the real question is how many people
>> would actually do that (and how many people would then suffer problems
>> because they upgraded their CPU/mobo and got massive failures on post-
>> boot.)
>
> Not sure why upgraded mobo's would fail due to a longer sample?
Not due to a longer sample, but a frozen sample.
> As more and more systems become dependent on clocksource==tsc
> and more and more people assume nanosecond-class measurements
> are relatively accurate, I'd expect the accuracy of tsc_khz
> to become more important. While desktop users might bristle
> at an extra second of boot delay, I'll bet many server
> farm administrators would gladly pay that upfront cost
> if they know an option exists.
Not really. The delta measurements aren't the issue here, but rather
walltime convergence.
-hpa
--
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