All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>,
	Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>,
	"linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] configure HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK for SGI_SN systems
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:50:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090106225054.GB3850@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1231275441.11687.110.camel@twins>

On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 09:57:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 12:34 -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > > All ia64 systems are potentially affected ... but perhaps you might
> > > > never see the problem on most because the itc clocks are synced as close
> > > > as s/w can get them when cpus are brought on line.
> > >
> > > Do you want Dimitri to resubmit with this set for all IA64 or leave it
> > > as is?
> > 
> > I'd like to understand the impact of turning on HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK
> > 
> > It looks like both the i386_defconfig and x86_64_defconfig choose this,
> > so at least ia64 will be hitting the well tested code paths
> > 
> > Have the other architectures just not hit this yet?  Or do they all have
> > "stable" sched_clock() functions?
> > 
> > 
> > sched_clock() seemed like such a straightforward thing to begin with. A
> > quick & easy way to measure a time delta ON THE SAME CPU.  I'm not at
> > all sure why it has been co-opted for general time measurement.
> 
> It came from the complication of needing to tell a remote cpu's time due
> to remote wakeups in the scheduler.

But doesn't scheduler tick advance the rq->clock?  Why do the others
need to fiddle with a remote runqueue's clock?  When that cpu starts
taking ticks again, it will update it's rq->clock field and start the
processes.  I guess I am a lot underinformed about the new scheduler
design.

Robin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>,
	Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>,
	"linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] configure HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK for SGI_SN systems
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 16:50:54 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090106225054.GB3850@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1231275441.11687.110.camel@twins>

On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 09:57:20PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-01-06 at 12:34 -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > > All ia64 systems are potentially affected ... but perhaps you might
> > > > never see the problem on most because the itc clocks are synced as close
> > > > as s/w can get them when cpus are brought on line.
> > >
> > > Do you want Dimitri to resubmit with this set for all IA64 or leave it
> > > as is?
> > 
> > I'd like to understand the impact of turning on HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK
> > 
> > It looks like both the i386_defconfig and x86_64_defconfig choose this,
> > so at least ia64 will be hitting the well tested code paths
> > 
> > Have the other architectures just not hit this yet?  Or do they all have
> > "stable" sched_clock() functions?
> > 
> > 
> > sched_clock() seemed like such a straightforward thing to begin with. A
> > quick & easy way to measure a time delta ON THE SAME CPU.  I'm not at
> > all sure why it has been co-opted for general time measurement.
> 
> It came from the complication of needing to tell a remote cpu's time due
> to remote wakeups in the scheduler.

But doesn't scheduler tick advance the rq->clock?  Why do the others
need to fiddle with a remote runqueue's clock?  When that cpu starts
taking ticks again, it will update it's rq->clock field and start the
processes.  I guess I am a lot underinformed about the new scheduler
design.

Robin

  reply	other threads:[~2009-01-06 22:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-06 16:27 [PATCH] configure HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK for SGI_SN systems Dimitri Sivanich
2009-01-06 16:27 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2009-01-06 17:12 ` Greg KH
2009-01-06 17:12   ` Greg KH
2009-01-06 20:15 ` Luck, Tony
2009-01-06 20:15   ` Luck, Tony
2009-01-06 20:19   ` Robin Holt
2009-01-06 20:19     ` Robin Holt
2009-01-06 20:34     ` Luck, Tony
2009-01-06 20:34       ` Luck, Tony
2009-01-06 20:57       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-06 20:57         ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-06 22:50         ` Robin Holt [this message]
2009-01-06 22:50           ` Robin Holt
2009-01-06 23:16           ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-06 23:16             ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-07  3:00             ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-07  3:00               ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-07  3:16               ` Jack Steiner
2009-01-07  3:16                 ` Jack Steiner
2009-01-07  7:28               ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-07  7:28                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-07  7:40                 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-07  7:40                   ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-07  9:43                 ` Robin Holt
2009-01-07  9:43                   ` Robin Holt
2009-01-07  9:53                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-07  9:53                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-07 13:32                     ` Dimitri Sivanich
2009-01-07 13:32                       ` Dimitri Sivanich
2009-01-07 15:16                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-07 15:16                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 18:48 ` Greg KH
2009-01-15 18:48   ` Greg KH
2009-01-15 19:21   ` Luck, Tony
2009-01-15 19:21     ` Luck, Tony
2009-01-22 19:04     ` Greg KH
2009-01-22 19:04       ` Greg KH

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=20090106225054.GB3850@sgi.com \
    --to=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sivanich@sgi.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@gmail.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    /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.