[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130507070500.GA8114@feng-snb>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 15:05:00 +0800
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: [GIT PULL] timer changes for v3.10
Hi Ingo,
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 08:53:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com> wrote:
>
> > > is even worse than that. Machine can stay is s2ram for weeks (for a
> > > lot more if it is desktop and you do s2ram for powersaving). Also
> > > temperature of CPU varies a lot between active and s2ram states. Is
> > > TSC good enough?
> >
> > Yes, I think it is relatively precise. Per our test, system time backed
> > by the S3 non stop TSC only has 1 second drift after 4 days running
> > (with mixed running and S3 states). And before using this feature, we've
> > seen many time drift problems due to the RTC HW or system FW with our
> > platforms.
>
> Nice result ...
>
> Is that with NTP running?
No, we haven't tested it with NTP yet.
>
> Without NTP, the TSC fast-calibration on bootup is not (expected to be)
> nearly as precise as the 1:345600 precision you've measured.
For the some Atom processor like the Moorestown, Medfield, we use a
fast TSC calibration by check the FSB freq and ratio from MSRs. See
mrst_calibrate_tsc() in arch/x86/platform/mrst/mrst.c, and the calculated
value is precise based on our test.
Thanks,
Feng
--
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