[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150105130035.GP30905@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 14:00:35 +0100
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>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu@...euvizoso.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] perf: Use monotonic clock as a source for
timestamps
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 04:51:56PM +0000, Pawel Moll wrote:
> Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 9 +++++++++
> kernel/events/core.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
> diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 4c81a86..8ead8d8 100644
> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2763,6 +2764,14 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be entirely omitted.
> allocator. This parameter is primarily for debugging
> and performance comparison.
>
> + perf_use_local_clock
> + [PERF]
> + Use local_clock() as a source for perf timestamps
> + generation. This was be the default behaviour and
> + this parameter can be used to maintain backward
> + compatibility or on older hardware with expensive
> + monotonic clock source.
> +
> pf. [PARIDE]
> See Documentation/blockdev/paride.txt.
So I'm always terminally confused on the naming of kernel parameters,
sometimes things are modules (even when they're not actually =m capable)
and get a module::foo naming or so and sometimes they're not.
So we want to use the module naming thing or not?
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 2b02c9f..5d0aa03 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -322,8 +323,41 @@ extern __weak const char *perf_pmu_name(void)
> return "pmu";
> }
>
> +static bool perf_use_local_clock;
> +static int __init perf_use_local_clock_setup(char *__unused)
> +{
> + perf_use_local_clock = true;
> + return 1;
> +}
> +__setup("perf_use_local_clock", perf_use_local_clock_setup);
> static inline u64 perf_clock(void)
> {
> + if (likely(!perf_use_local_clock))
> + return ktime_get_mono_fast_ns();
> +
> return local_clock();
> }
Since this all is boot time, should we not use things like static_key
and avoid the 'pointless' conditional at runtime?
--
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