From: P@draigBrady.com
To: Jonathan Lundell <linux@lundell-bros.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: x86 TSC time warp puzzle
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 09:59:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <425101EA.7080001@draigBrady.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <p06230505be73a5c345c7@[10.2.3.6]>
Jonathan Lundell wrote:
> Well, not actually a time warp, though it feels like one.
>
> I'm doing some real-time bit-twiddling in a driver, using the TSC to
> measure out delays on the order of hundreds of nanoseconds. Because I
> want an upper limit on the delay, I disable interrupts around it.
>
> The logic is something like:
>
> local_irq_save
> out(set a bit)
> t0 = TSC
> wait while (t = (TSC - t0)) < delay_time
> out(clear the bit)
> local_irq_restore
>
> From time to time, when I exit the delay, t is *much* bigger than
> delay_time. If delay_time is, say, 300ns, t is usually no more than
> 325ns. But every so often, t can be 2000, or 10000, or even much higher.
>
> The value of t seems to depend on the CPU involved, The worst case is
> with an Intel 915GV chipset, where t approaches 500 microseconds (!).
Probably not the same thing, but on 2.4 I was noticing
large TSC jumps, the magnitude of which was dependent on CPU speed.
They were always around 1.26ms on my 3.4GHz dual HT xeon system.
That's (2^32)/(3.4*10^9) which suggested it was a 32 bit overflow
somewhere, which pointed me at:
http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/i386/kernel/time.c?v=2.4.28#L96
This implied the TSCs were drifting relative to each other
(even between logical CPUs on 1 package).
I worked around the problem by setting the IRQ affinity
for my ethernet IRQs (the source of the do_gettimeofday()s)
to a particular logical CPU rather than a physical CPU and also
tied the timer interrupt to CPU0.
I guess I could also maintain a last_tsc_low for each CPU also?
Pádraig.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-04 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-02 1:43 x86 TSC time warp puzzle Jonathan Lundell
2005-04-04 8:59 ` P [this message]
2005-04-04 13:58 ` Joe Korty
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-04-02 7:05 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2005-04-02 8:13 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-03 4:04 ` Jonathan Lundell
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=425101EA.7080001@draigBrady.com \
--to=p@draigbrady.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@lundell-bros.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