From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: scheduler clock for MXS [Was: Re: Wakeup latency measured with SCHED_TRACER depends on HZ]
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 22:28:59 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121105222859.GI28327@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5097E4A9.3090008@meduna.org>
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 05:09:13PM +0100, Stanislav Meduna wrote:
> On 05.11.2012 14:46, Shawn Guo wrote:
>
> >>> From my quick testing on imx23 with printk timestamp, it's not OK,
> >>> so we may need to leave imx23 out there.
> >>
> > I should say it's practically not OK since it wraps in such a short
> > period. But it actually works as expected.
> >
> >> Hmm, does it wrap after 2 seconds?
> >
> > Yes, it does wrap after ~2 seconds.
>
> This is weird. AFAIK the printk should be using sched_clock(),
> which is a weak symbol overridden in arch/arm/kernel/sched_clock.c
> and it should take care of the extension to never-ever-wrapping
> 64-bit timestamp. Looks that it does not and if it does not,
> I think there is more to be worried of than just printk timestamps.
It most certainly does handle the wrapping correctly - it was designed
to from the very start.
> BTW this patch deserves IMHO looking at
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1193631/
> but it is probably not the problem here.
Yes, that patch is probably required... if an update to the sched_clock
epoch happens on a different CPU, then the epoch cycles can be in advance
of the read clock cycle value. That needs to get into my patch system.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-05 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <50919AFF.3060602@meduna.org>
[not found] ` <5093D8DE.70505@meduna.org>
[not found] ` <20121105025753.GA26528@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net>
2012-11-05 9:14 ` scheduler clock for MXS [Was: Re: Wakeup latency measured with SCHED_TRACER depends on HZ] Stanislav Meduna
2012-11-05 13:46 ` Shawn Guo
2012-11-05 16:09 ` Stanislav Meduna
2012-11-05 22:28 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2012-11-06 2:40 ` Shawn Guo
2012-11-06 10:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-06 13:49 ` Shawn Guo
2012-11-06 20:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-06 8:34 ` scheduler clock for MXS Stanislav Meduna
2012-11-06 9:45 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-06 13:46 ` Shawn Guo
2012-11-06 20:20 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-06 22:30 ` Stanislav Meduna
2012-11-06 22:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-07 7:13 ` Shawn Guo
2012-11-08 21:27 ` Stanislav Meduna
2012-11-08 22:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-11-08 22:45 ` [PATCH] ARM: mxs: Setup scheduler clock Stanislav Meduna
2012-11-12 1:54 ` Shawn Guo
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=20121105222859.GI28327@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--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).