public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@transmeta.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: rdtsc to mili secs?
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 21:12:31 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20001118211231.A382@bug.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3A078C65.B3C146EC@mira.net> <E13t7ht-0007Kv-00@the-village.bc.nu> <20001110154254.A33@bug.ucw.cz> <8uhps8$1tm$1@cesium.transmeta.com> <20001114222240.A1537@bug.ucw.cz> <3A12FA97.ACFF1577@transmeta.com> <20001116115730.A665@suse.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20001116115730.A665@suse.cz>; from Vojtech Pavlik on Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 11:57:30AM +0100

Hi!

> > > > Intel PIIX-based systems will do duty-cycle throttling, for example.
> > > 
> > > Don't think so. My toshiba is PIIX-based, AFAIC:
> > 
> > Interesting.  Some will, definitely.  Didn't know that wasn't universal.
> > 
> > Clearly, on a machine like that, there is no hope for RDTSC, at least
> > unless the CPU (and OS!) gets notification that the TSC needs to be
> > recalibrated whenever it switches.
> > 
> > > Still, it is willing to run with RDTSC at 300MHz, 150MHz, and
> > > 40MHz. (The last one in _extreme_ cases when CPU fan fails -- running
> > > at 40MHz is better than cooking cpu).
> 
> I believe that pulsing the STPCLK pin of the processor by connecting it
> to a say 32kHz signal and then changing the duty cycle of that signal
> could have the effect of slowing down the processor to these speeds.
> 
> Somehow I can't believe a PMMX would be able to run at 40MHz. Which in
> turn means that STPCLK also stops TSC, which is equally bad.

Why not? From 300MHz to 40MHz... 10 times, that is not that big
difference. (I've ran k6/400 at 66MHz, IIRC, while debugging -- I'm
not really sure, and don't want to open machine, but it should work).

> Anyway, this should be solvable by checking for clock change in the
> timer interrupt. This way we should be able to detect when the clock
> went weird with a 10 ms accuracy. And compensate for that. It should be
> possible to keep a 'reasonable' clock running even through the clock
> changes, where reasonable means constantly growing and as close to real
> time as 10 ms difference max.
> 
> Yes, this is not perfect, but still keep every program quite happy and
> running.

No. Udelay has just gone wrong and your old ISA xxx card just crashed
whole system. Oops.

BTW I mailed patch to do exactly that kind of autodetection to the
list some time ago. (I just can't find it now :-( -- search archives
for 'TSC is slower than it should be'.
								Pavel

-- 
I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2000-11-18 22:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-11-05 23:09 rdtsc to mili secs? Sushil Agarwal
2000-11-06  0:10 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-11-06  0:28   ` Alan Cox
2000-11-06  0:34     ` Andrea Arcangeli
2000-11-06  0:46       ` Alan Cox
2000-11-06 17:17     ` Anton Blanchard
2000-11-06 17:27       ` Alan Cox
2000-11-07  5:00       ` Antony Suter
2000-11-07  6:10         ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-07 12:18         ` Alan Cox
2000-11-10 14:42           ` Pavel Machek
2000-11-10 21:38             ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-10 22:23               ` Rogier Wolff
2000-11-10 23:00                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-14 21:22               ` Pavel Machek
2000-11-15 21:05                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-16 10:57                   ` Vojtech Pavlik
2000-11-16 23:09                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-18 20:13                       ` Pavel Machek
2000-11-18 23:48                         ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-11-19  9:21                           ` Vojtech Pavlik
2000-11-18 20:12                     ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2000-11-18 22:13                       ` Vojtech Pavlik
2000-11-19 20:24                         ` Pavel Machek
2000-11-19 21:46                           ` Vojtech Pavlik
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-11-06  8:15 ming_l

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=20001118211231.A382@bug.ucw.cz \
    --to=pavel@suse.cz \
    --cc=hpa@transmeta.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vojtech@suse.cz \
    /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