From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-parisc-linux@dsl2.external.hp.com>
Received: from smtp-out.tiscali.be (spoolo2.tiscali.be [62.235.13.211])
	by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BBF0483E
	for <parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org>; Sat, 20 Sep 2003 12:02:18 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <3F6C9622.60402@tiscali.be>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 18:02:10 +0000
From: Joel Soete <soete.joel@tiscali.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@baldric.uwo.ca>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>, parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] sched_clock implementation
References: <20030918203510.GD21596@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <3F6B2199.8050402@tiscali.be> <20030919160035.GG18225@systemhalted>
In-Reply-To: <20030919160035.GG18225@systemhalted>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org
Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org
List-Help: <mailto:parisc-linux-request@lists.parisc-linux.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux>,
	<mailto:parisc-linux-request@lists.parisc-linux.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: parisc-linux developers list <parisc-linux.lists.parisc-linux.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux>,
	<mailto:parisc-linux-request@lists.parisc-linux.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.parisc-linux.org/pipermail/parisc-linux/>

Carlos O'Donell wrote:

>On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 03:32:41PM +0000, Joel Soete wrote:
>  
>
>>Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Anyone want to do better than the lame implementation?  ;-)
>>>
>>>----- Forwarded message from Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> -----
>>>
>>>I'll be merging Ingo & Con's CPOU scheduler changes into Linus's tree soon.
>>>
>>>It does require that the architecture provides a new timing function:
>>>
>>>A lame implementation is:
>>>
>>>/*
>>>* Returns nanoseconds
>>>*/
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Hi Willy,
>>
>>(Certainly yet another stupid question but) to reach such accuracy we 
>>would need to have access to some 'time device' with an accuracy better 
>>then the nanosec (iirc 10^-9) (because it doesn't seems to me possible 
>>to get enough accuracy with cpu clock < 10^9 ie 1Ghz: the most case for 
>>parisc systems). Does it exist such device and where to start to read 
>>some doc?
>>    
>>
>
>We could use cr16 to get better accuracy. See list discussions about
>fast gettimeofday.
>
>c.
>
Hi all,

a quick look into paxx.pdf which about CR16 speak of "peak instruction 
rate" but do not define anywhere?
I presume that is the cpu clock but would like somebody confirm.

Thanks in advance,
    Joel