From: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>
To: James Cleverdon <jamesclv@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>,
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, ak@suse.de,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com,
anton.wilson@camotion.com
Subject: Re: do_gettimeofday vs. rdtsc in the scheduler
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 08:40:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020918084022.A67562@ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200209171502.04524.jamesclv@us.ibm.com>; from jamesclv@us.ibm.com on Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 03:02:04PM -0700
On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 03:02:04PM -0700, James Cleverdon wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 September 2002 02:18 pm, David S. Miller wrote:
> > From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> > Date: 17 Sep 2002 22:28:12 +0100
> >
> > A bus clock - but things like the x440 have more than one bus clock. Its
> > NUMA. Also the bus clock and rdtsc clock are different - rdtsc is
> > dependant on the multiplier. Shove a celeron 300 and a celeron 450 in a
> > BP6 board with tsc on and enjoy
> >
> > That's mostly my point.
> >
> > If the bus clocks differ, then great create some system wide crystal
> > oscillator. That's a detail, the important bit is that you don't need
> > to go out to the system bus to read the tick value, it must be cpu
> > local to be effective and without serious performance impact.
> > -
>
> It's more than just a detail. Sequent's last NUMA system (_not_ the NUMA-Q;
> never released) did exactly what you suggest. The midplane card generated
> the bus clock for all quad modules. We had requested this feature because it
> was such a pain dealing with clock drift between nodes in the OS.
>
> The HW guys were able to give us synchronized bus clocks on a 16-way box, but
> warned us that it would not be practical on the 256-way. Too much clock skew
> at those speeds, or something like that. I suppose you could trade off
> interconnect rate for clock sync, but then performance would suffer.
>
> I don't know how Sun and SGI manage with their larger systems. Either they
> don't do clock sync, or they may have to make expensive tradeoffs.
>
> Interestingly, Intel's IA64 manual does not guarantee that the CPU clock (and
> thus its TSC register) has anything to do with the bus clock rate. Maybe
> they want to dabble with asynchronous logic or multiple clock domains in
> future CPUs.
The point here is: You don't need a synchronized bus clock. You don't
need synchronized CPU clocks. You need a synchronized system-wide clock
that doesn't drive any bus or CPU, just a simple counter in every CPU
that you can read from inside the CPU. You can pull that pretty far and
to many CPUs. That's what I understand Sun does.
--
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-18 6:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200209172020.g8HKKPF13227@eng2.beaverton.ibm.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
[not found] ` <1032294559.22815.180.camel@cog.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
[not found] ` <20020917.133933.69057655.davem@redhat.com.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2002-09-17 21:00 ` do_gettimeofday vs. rdtsc in the scheduler Andi Kleen
2002-09-17 20:54 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-17 21:28 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-17 21:18 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-17 22:02 ` James Cleverdon
2002-09-17 22:44 ` Andi Kleen
2002-09-17 22:38 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-17 22:55 ` James Cleverdon
2002-09-17 23:12 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-17 23:32 ` john stultz
2002-09-17 23:32 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-17 23:52 ` Andi Kleen
2002-09-17 23:46 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-17 23:58 ` Andi Kleen
2002-09-17 23:51 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-18 0:05 ` Andi Kleen
2002-09-18 1:04 ` James Cleverdon
2002-09-19 18:02 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2002-09-20 11:04 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2002-09-19 11:20 ` Mikael Pettersson
2002-09-19 13:27 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-19 13:39 ` Mikael Pettersson
2002-09-20 15:26 ` John Levon
2002-09-18 6:40 ` Vojtech Pavlik [this message]
2002-09-19 18:04 ` Andrea Arcangeli
[not found] <200209172020.g8HKKPF13227@eng2.beaverton.ibm.com>
2002-09-17 20:29 ` Fwd: " john stultz
2002-09-17 20:39 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-17 20:57 ` john stultz
2002-09-17 20:56 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-09 22:21 anton wilson
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=20020918084022.A67562@ucw.cz \
--to=vojtech@suse.cz \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=anton.wilson@camotion.com \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=jamesclv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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