[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1323747782.4078.144.camel@work-vm>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 19:43:02 -0800
From: john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kumar Sundararajan <kumar@...com>,
Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] ABI for clock_gettime_ns
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 04:24 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 05:26:36PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On x86-64, clock_gettime is so fast that the overhead converting to and
> > from nanoseconds is non-negligible. clock_gettime_ns is a different
> > interface that is potentially faster. If people like the ABI, I'll
> > implement an optimized version.
>
> I am not so interested in performance optimizations, but do I think
> offering time in nanoseconds is attractive from an application point
> of view. The timespec is impractical for everyone.
>
> While you are at it with new syscalls, why not make a clean break from
> POSIX and fix the uglies?
>
> - New name, to distance ourselves from POSIX (clock_ns_get?)
> - Family of calls, with set/get
> - Sub nanosecond field
> - TAI time base (or according to parameter?)
Having a CLOCK_TAI would be interesting across the board. We already
keep a TAI offset in the ntp code. However, I'm not sure if ntp actually
sets it these days.
thanks
-john
--
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