From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sched_clock() uses are broken
Date: 02 May 2006 18:43:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <p73slns5qda.fsf@bragg.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060502132953.GA30146@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:
>
> However, this is not the case. On x86 with TSC, it returns a 54 bit
> number. This means that when t1 < t0, time_passed_ns becomes a very
> large number which no longer represents the amount of time.
Good point. For a 1Ghz system this would happen every ~0.57 years.
The problem is there is AFAIK no non destructive[1] way to find out how
many bits the TSC has
Destructive would be to overwrite it with -1 and see how many stick.
> All uses in kernel/sched.c seem to be aflicted by this problem.
>
> There are several solutions to this - the most obvious being that we
> need a function which returns the nanosecond difference between two
> sched_clock() return values, and this function needs to know how to
> handle the case where sched_clock() has wrapped.
Ok it can be done with a simple test.
>
> IOW:
>
> t0 = sched_clock();
> /* do something */
> t1 = sched_clock();
>
> time_passed = sched_clock_diff(t1, t0);
>
> Comments?
Agreed it's a problem, but probably a small one. At worst you'll get
a small scheduling hickup every half year, which should be hardly
that big an issue.
Might chose to just ignore it with a big fat comment?
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-02 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-02 13:29 sched_clock() uses are broken Russell King
2006-05-02 14:21 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-02 16:43 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2006-05-02 16:50 ` Russell King
2006-05-02 17:01 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-02 17:18 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-02 18:55 ` Russell King
2006-05-02 19:05 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-02 19:08 ` Russell King
2006-05-02 19:23 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-02 21:35 ` Russell King
2006-05-02 17:15 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-04 3:50 ` George Anzinger
2006-05-04 14:18 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-02 16:54 ` Christopher Friesen
2006-05-02 16:59 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-02 17:07 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-03 7:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-03 7:40 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-03 9:11 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-03 9:16 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-03 9:31 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-07 12:33 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 12:43 ` Russell King
2006-05-07 12:56 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 13:00 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 13:18 ` Russell King
2006-05-07 13:30 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 13:55 ` Russell King
2006-05-07 14:04 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 16:03 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-07 16:53 ` Russell King
2006-05-07 17:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-07 17:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-07 17:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-08 4:14 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-08 4:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-08 4:46 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-08 5:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-08 5:30 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-04 20:02 ` Florian Paul Schmidt
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=p73slns5qda.fsf@bragg.suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
/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.