[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1185848076.5162.39.camel@localhost>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:14:36 -0400
From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Robert.Olsson@...a.slu.se,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: fscked clock sources revisited
On Mon, 2007-30-07 at 18:37 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> Relatively speaking, the acpi_pm numbers are at least consistent and
> about as much as so as jiffies. Jiffies numbers are also possibly
> better, at least in part, because of the decreased accuracy and errors
> propagating.
I am not sure jiffies gives innacurate results. It gives the best
performance on the dual xeon i tested on, all the time. Very consistent.
On its accuracy: I was able to validate it With pktgen generating
traffic and some external hardware tool capturing the interpacket gaps
etc.
> tsc acts as expected, since every time your cpu changes power
> management state (which it is going to do dynamically) the TSC
> rates change and thus the accuracy goes into outer-space.
Robert was saying he had even more bizare results with opteron given the
NUMA nature.
> There really isn't much that can be done by any of this. These issues
> exist because of hardware limitations, nobody bothered to build
> x86/x86_64 systems with a system wide TICK register that is both
> impervious to cpu frequence scaling and also cheap to access.
>
> So the above is what we basically have to live with :-)
That is a bummer. I am going to test with hpet when i get the chance
and perhaps turn off all the other sources if nothing good comes out; i
need my numbers ;->
cheers,
jamal
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists