From: js@sig21.net (Johannes Stezenbach)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Q: sched_clock() vs. clocksource, how to implement correctly
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 15:18:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100426131843.GA28332@sig21.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100424205011.GA21632@sig21.net>
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 10:50:11PM +0200, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> /*
> * Orion's sched_clock implementation. It has a resolution of
> * at least 7.5ns (133MHz TCLK) and a maximum value of 834 days.
> *
> * Because the hardware timer period is quite short (21 secs if
> * 200MHz TCLK) and because cnt32_to_63() needs to be called at
> * least once per half period to work properly, a kernel timer is
> * set up to ensure this requirement is always met.
> */
> #define TCLK2NS_SCALE_FACTOR 8
I found the following discussion of the sched_clock()
implementation trade-offs very informative:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/4/15/299
It mentions clocksource_calc_mult_shift() which was added in 2.6.33,
however I had some difficulties understanding the meaning of the minsec
parameter, especially since all existing callers use a value of 4.
But when using minsec = 365*24*60*60 (1 year) it results in the shift value of 8.
So finally the pieces connect together :-)
> BTW, even though this uses TCLK2NS_SCALE_FACTOR of 8, the same file
> uses a shift vaue of 20 for the orion_clksrc...
It seems clocksource_cyc2ns() is used in kernel/time/timekeeping.c
and kernel/time/clocksource.c only on relatively
small delta values, so there's no need to worry
about overflow and a large clocksource.shift and .mult is OK.
(Apparently the minsec value of 4 mentioned above is suitable
for timekeeping? Where does the 4 come from?)
Thanks,
Johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-26 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-23 15:09 Q: sched_clock() vs. clocksource, how to implement correctly Johannes Stezenbach
2010-04-23 16:29 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2010-04-24 20:50 ` Johannes Stezenbach
2010-04-25 14:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-26 13:18 ` Johannes Stezenbach [this message]
2010-04-26 23:48 ` Daniel Walker
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=20100426131843.GA28332@sig21.net \
--to=js@sig21.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).