[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1609211435050.5573@nanos>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 14:36:23 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, rtc-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] time: alarmtimer: Add the trcepoints for
alarmtimer
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:26:20 +0200 (CEST)
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > A single u64 does not take more storage space than this and it's a single
> > store.
>
> So to use rtc_tm_to_time64()? Is the work to do the calculations of the
> conversion faster than a bunch of stores that are going to be in hot
> cache?
Look at the call site. It has already the scalar nsec value and it does a
conversion to rtc time in order to trace it.
Ditto for the other tracepoints where the conversion from scalar nsec is
done in the tracepoint itself.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists