[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <27240C0AC20F114CBF8149A2696CBE4A01D053BC@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 09:30:55 +0000
From: "Liu, Chuansheng" <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Wang, Xiaoming" <xiaoming.wang@...el.com>
CC: "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] lib/spinlock_debug: Tweak the loop time to fit
different _delay()
Hello Peter,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Zijlstra [mailto:peterz@...radead.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 4:55 PM
> To: Wang, Xiaoming
> Cc: mingo@...hat.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Liu, Chuansheng
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/spinlock_debug: Tweak the loop time to fit different
> _delay()
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 06:40:38PM -0400, Wang, Xiaoming wrote:
> > loops_per_jiffy*Hz is not always 1 second exactly
> > it depends on the realization of _delay() .
> > delay_tsc is used as _delay() in arch/x86/lib/delay.c
>
> This just states delay() is broken. The primary response should be to
> try and fix that, no?
delay(1s_count) is accurate, but delay(1) is not accurate indeed, since executing
some instruction, then the 1 cycle delay maybe be used already.
--
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