[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151020085408.GA2542@netboy>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 10:54:08 +0200
From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc: Christopher Hall <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kevin.b.stanton@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] Produce system time from correlated clocksource
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 05:36:56PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> If we're only tracking 4ms of history, how does this solution
> measurably improve the error over using the timestamps to generate
> MONOTONIC_RAW clock deltas (which doesn't require keeping any history)
> and using getnstime_raw_and_real to take an anchor point to calculate
> the delta from? Why is adding complexity necessary?
This idea is variant of what I suggested in another reply in this
thread. To my understanding, there is no need at all to keep a
history arbitrarily 4 ms long. Instead, the DSP driver (or whoever
else may need such a thing) can simply sample the system time at the
rate needed for that particular application.
Thanks,
Richard
--
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