public inbox for linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "John Hawkes" <hawkes@sgi.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] - sched_clock() broken for ia64 SN platform
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 04:09:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-106930158803834@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-106928980122896@msgid-missing>

From: "David Mosberger" <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com>> >>>>> On Wed, 19 Nov 2003
16:56:23 -0800 (PST), John Hawkes <hawkes@babylon.engr.sgi.com> said:
>
>   John> We might instead want to implement a more general scheme,
>   John> along the lines of what is done by (struct time_interpolator),
>   John> to provide a framework to solve this for other architectures
>   John> that have "drifty" non-default timebases.
>
> My sense is that with a bit of thinking, it would be possible to come
> up with a solution that allows even drifty platforms to use ITC for
> sched_clock()---it serves very a specific purpose in the scheduler and
> scalability is key and perfect accuracy is not (unlike for
> gettimeofday).  I don't think anything that goes out to read a single
> (shared) platform counter will be sufficiently scalable to the number
> of CPUs you guys are talking about.  But yes, it would be much more
> effort than just adding Yet Another Callback.  The rewards would be
> bigger, though, too...

In 2.4 the scheduler used "jiffies" directly as a timestamp for this purpose.
Then for some reason someone decided to abstract that into sched_clock(), to
let every architecture decide how to implement it.  The alpha architecture
implements sched_clock() with jiffies.  The i386 uses the TSC (which might not
be synchronized for all platforms?).  The ia64 uses the ITC.

I'd like to hear an argument about why sched_clock() needs sub-microsecond
accuracy, instead of just using jiffies, when one use of sched_clock() is to
compare a delta time against cache_decay_ticks, which is a
"jiffies"-granularity value, and the other use is to determine the relative
computebound-vs-interactive characteristics of the process.

John Hawkes


  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-11-20  4:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-11-20  0:56 [PATCH] - sched_clock() broken for ia64 SN platform John Hawkes
2003-11-20  1:24 ` David Mosberger
2003-11-20  4:09 ` John Hawkes [this message]
2003-11-20  6:01 ` David Mosberger
2003-11-20 15:23 ` Jack Steiner
2003-11-20 17:25 ` Grant Grundler
2003-11-20 17:25 ` Rich Altmaier
2003-11-20 18:32 ` David Mosberger
2003-11-20 19:20 ` Robin Holt
2003-11-20 19:23 ` Robin Holt
2003-11-20 20:58 ` John Hawkes
2003-11-20 21:27 ` David Mosberger
2003-11-20 21:58 ` john stultz
2003-11-20 22:14 ` John Hawkes

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=marc-linux-ia64-106930158803834@msgid-missing \
    --to=hawkes@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.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