public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: Jim Houston <jim.houston@attbi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	high-res-timers-discourse@lists.sourceforge.net,
	jim.houston@ccur.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] improved boot time TSC synchronization
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 01:00:45 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030117010045.GA14664@bjl1.asuk.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3E274FB1.EF85F6E0@attbi.com>

Jim Houston wrote:
> The patch currently prints the round-trip time and the max_delta.
> On a Quad P4 Xeon, I got round-trip times in the 0.7 microsecond
> range which is disappointing. The max_delta was almost always
> zero cycles meaning that the feedback loop thinks that the TSC values
> are perfectly synchronized.

Is it reasonable to repeat the test over a duration of 10^6 cycles (or
more) such that you could detect any drift after synchronisation, as
well as variation _during_ that time interval?

I'm thinking of those spread spectrum clocks, which I gather are done
by frequency modulating the clock.  It may be possible to detect:

	(a) whether multiple CPUs with spread spectrum clocks are
	    actually locked to each other, or if the modulation
	    of each is independent

	(b) whether multiple CPUs are drifting w.r.t. each other
	    because of independent clock sources

Although drift tends to be small, it should be possible to determine
"these clocks drifted by <1ppm during the test interval", which is a
pretty good indication of whether it is safe to use the TSC for
gettimeofday() or not.

-- Jamie


  reply	other threads:[~2003-01-17  0:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-01-16 16:44 [PATCH] improved boot time TSC synchronization Jim Houston
2003-01-16 17:54 ` David Mosberger
2003-01-16 21:33 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-17  0:34   ` Jim Houston
2003-01-17  1:00     ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2003-01-17  3:35       ` Jim Houston
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-21  1:21 Jim Houston

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=20030117010045.GA14664@bjl1.asuk.net \
    --to=jamie@shareable.org \
    --cc=high-res-timers-discourse@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=jim.houston@attbi.com \
    --cc=jim.houston@ccur.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