From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: "Alok kataria" <alokkataria1@gmail.com>
Cc: akataria@vmware.com, "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Dan Hecht" <dhecht@vmware.com>, "Tim Mann" <mann@vmware.com>,
"Zachary Amsden" <zach@vmware.com>,
"Sahil Rihan" <srihan@vmware.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86:Use cpu_khz for loops_per_jiffy calculation
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 06:16:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080604061637.6bab3f67@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35f686220806032101h103152dat841818982aaa5052@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:01:54 -0700
"Alok kataria" <alokkataria1@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Arjan van de Ven
> <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 17:41:09 -0700
> > Alok Kataria <akataria@vmware.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On X86 platform we can use the value of cpu_khz computed during tsc
> >> calibration to calculate the loops_per_jiffy value. Its very
> >> important to keep the error in lpj values to minimum as any error
> >> in that may result in kernel panic in check_timer.
> >> In virtualization environment on a highly overloaded host, the
> >> guest delay calibration may sometimes result in errors beyond the
> >> ~50% that timer_irq_works can handle, resulting in the guest
> >> panicking.
> > \
> >
> > can you guarantee that the rate tsc ticks at is the same as the
> > current CPU frequency? Answer: You can't....
> >
>
> I think at the boot time atleast we can assume that, no ?
Nope, absolutely not.
1) The rate TSC ticks may or may not be the maximum frequency (usually
is, but no guarantee)
2) The BIOS might not boot your system at the maximum frequency (think
"laptop on battery")... that's really up to the BIOS.
>
> > sadly we do need to calibrate this...
> >
> > In addition, clearly you can have different cpus in a system run at
> > a different rate (both in terms of cpu_khz and, independently, in
> > terms of tsc rate)
> >
>
> Again yes at run time frequency's may change but they shouldn't at
> boottime. AFAIK, i don't think there are X86 MP systems with
> asymmetric cpus i.e. systems with different
> base frequencies. If thats not true then there sure is a problem.
there's nothing that guarantees this. (Well maybe Dell's website does
because they want to sell you 2 expensive cpus rather than 1 cheap 1
expensive one ;-)
>
> Thanks,
> Alok
>
> >
> > --
> > If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
> > For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
> > visit http://www.lesswatts.org
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> > linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> >
--
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-04 13:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-04 0:41 [RFC PATCH] x86:Use cpu_khz for loops_per_jiffy calculation Alok Kataria
2008-06-04 1:20 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-06-04 4:01 ` Alok kataria
2008-06-04 13:16 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2008-06-05 18:37 ` Alok Kataria
2008-06-20 1:22 ` Alok Kataria
2008-06-20 11:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-20 22:06 ` Alok Kataria
2008-06-23 20:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-23 23:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-23 23:34 ` Alok Kataria
2008-06-23 23:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-24 1:21 ` Alok Kataria
2008-06-24 11:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-24 17:57 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-26 17:20 ` Alok Kataria
2008-06-26 17:35 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-26 18:10 ` Alok Kataria
2008-06-26 22:16 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-26 23:10 ` Alok Kataria
2008-06-27 8:12 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-04 14:17 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-09 13:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-09 17:55 ` Alok Kataria
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=20080604061637.6bab3f67@infradead.org \
--to=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=akataria@vmware.com \
--cc=alokkataria1@gmail.com \
--cc=dhecht@vmware.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mann@vmware.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=srihan@vmware.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zach@vmware.com \
/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