[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrVdAGbp-ogvideZ6GiDVu8W3v+6Z=hJSrr+62U50HG8wg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 13:23:54 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc: Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kumar Sundararajan <kumar@...com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: Re: clock_gettime_ns
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:17 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Arun Sharma <asharma@...com> wrote:
>> A couple of years ago Andy posted this patch series:
>>
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1233209/
>>
>> These patches have been in use at facebook for a couple of years and along
>> with a vDSO implementation of thread_cpu_time(), they have proven useful for
>> our profilers.
>>
>> I didn't see any arguments against this patch series. Did I miss some
>> discussion on the topic?
>
> (I've got a new email address, just fyi)
>
> So, looking at the thread, I think Richard brought up the issue that
> the net performance gain with the new interface wasn't significant
> after the optimizations were applied to both interfaces.
>
> If we're going to add a new interface that uses something other then a
> timespec, we likely need to put some serious thought into that new
> type, and see how it could be used across a number of syscalls. Some
> of the discussion around dealing with the 2038 issue touched on this.
>
> But getting those optimizations to the existing interface merged would
> be nice, though. Anyone want to resend the patch?
It's already in. See 5f293474c4c6c4dc2baaf2dfd486748b5986de76, etc.
--Andy
--
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