[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140929152832.GL4140@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 17:28:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>
Cc: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf: Add sampling of the raw monotonic clock
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 03:34:32PM +0100, Pawel Moll wrote:
> @@ -4456,6 +4459,13 @@ static void __perf_event_header__init_id(struct perf_event_header *header,
> data->cpu_entry.cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
> data->cpu_entry.reserved = 0;
> }
> +
> + if (sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_CLOCK_RAW_MONOTONIC) {
> + struct timespec now;
> +
> + getrawmonotonic(&now);
> + data->clock_raw_monotonic = timespec_to_ns(&now);
> + }
> }
>
This cannot work, getrawmonotonic() isn't NMI-safe and there's
nothing stopping this being used from NMI context.
Also getrawmonotonic() + timespec_to_ns() will make tglx sad, he's just
done a tree-wide eradication of silly conversions and now you're adding
a ns -> timespec -> ns dance right back.
I _think_ you want ktime_get_mono_fast_ns(), but this does bring us
right back to the question/discussion on which timebase you'd want to
sync again. MONO does make sense for most cases, but I think we've had
fairly sane stories for people wanting to sync against other clocks.
A well..
--
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