From: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kumar Sundararajan <kumar@fb.com>,
Arun Sharma <asharma@fb.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] ABI for clock_gettime_ns
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 19:43:02 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1323747782.4078.144.camel@work-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111213032406.GA9604@netboy.at.omicron.at>
On Tue, 2011-12-13 at 04:24 +0100, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 05:26:36PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On x86-64, clock_gettime is so fast that the overhead converting to and
> > from nanoseconds is non-negligible. clock_gettime_ns is a different
> > interface that is potentially faster. If people like the ABI, I'll
> > implement an optimized version.
>
> I am not so interested in performance optimizations, but do I think
> offering time in nanoseconds is attractive from an application point
> of view. The timespec is impractical for everyone.
>
> While you are at it with new syscalls, why not make a clean break from
> POSIX and fix the uglies?
>
> - New name, to distance ourselves from POSIX (clock_ns_get?)
> - Family of calls, with set/get
> - Sub nanosecond field
> - TAI time base (or according to parameter?)
Having a CLOCK_TAI would be interesting across the board. We already
keep a TAI offset in the ntp code. However, I'm not sure if ntp actually
sets it these days.
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-13 3:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-13 1:26 [RFC 0/2] ABI for clock_gettime_ns Andy Lutomirski
2011-12-13 1:26 ` [RFC 1/2] Add clock_gettime_ns syscall Andy Lutomirski
2011-12-13 3:32 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-13 1:26 ` [RFC 2/2] x86-64: Add __vdso_clock_gettime_ns vsyscall Andy Lutomirski
2011-12-13 3:24 ` [RFC 0/2] ABI for clock_gettime_ns Richard Cochran
2011-12-13 3:43 ` john stultz [this message]
2011-12-13 7:09 ` Andy Lutomirski
2011-12-14 7:46 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-14 16:48 ` john stultz
2011-12-14 17:15 ` Andy Lutomirski
2011-12-14 17:31 ` john stultz
2011-12-14 18:37 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-14 18:30 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-14 19:07 ` john stultz
2011-12-14 19:20 ` Andy Lutomirski
2011-12-14 21:34 ` john stultz
2011-12-15 11:35 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-22 12:03 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-24 5:59 ` Andy Lutomirski
2011-12-24 6:50 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-25 4:06 ` Andy Lutomirski
2011-12-14 7:20 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-14 16:23 ` john stultz
2011-12-14 18:21 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-14 18:57 ` john stultz
2012-01-07 19:51 ` Richard Cochran
2011-12-21 0:50 ` Arun Sharma
2011-12-21 1:07 ` Andy Lutomirski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1323747782.4078.144.camel@work-vm \
--to=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=asharma@fb.com \
--cc=kumar@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.