public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: George Anzinger <george@mvista.com>
To: john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Shailabh Nagar <nagar@watson.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	elsa-devel <elsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net,
	ckrm-tech <ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Guillaume Thouvenin <guillaume.thouvenin@bull.net>,
	Jay Lan <jlan@sgi.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][Patch 1/5] nanosecond timestamps and diffs
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 16:54:22 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <439E1BBE.4040405@mvista.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1134418034.14627.14.camel@cog.beaverton.ibm.com>

john stultz wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 20:00 +0000, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
> 
>>john stultz wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 19:31 +0000, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Christoph Lameter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Shailabh Nagar wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>+void getnstimestamp(struct timespec *ts)
>>>>>
>>>>>There is already getnstimeofday in the kernel.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, and that function is being used within the getnstimestamp() being proposed.
>>>>However, John Stultz had advised that getnstimeofday could get affected by calls to
>>>>settimeofday and had recommended adjusting the getnstimeofday value with wall_to_monotonic.
>>>>
>>>>John, could you elaborate ?
>>>
>>>I think you pretty well have it covered. 
>>>
>>>getnstimeofday + wall_to_monotonic should be higher-res and more
>>>reliable (then TSC based sched_clock(), for example) for getting a
>>>timestamp.
>>>
>>>There may be performance concerns as you have to access the clock
>>>hardware in getnstimeofday(), but there really is no other way for
>>>reliable finely grained monotonically increasing timestamps.
>>>
> 
> 
>>Thanks, that clarifies. I guess the other underlying concern here would be whether these
>>improvements (in resolution and reliability) should be going into getnstimeofday()
>>itself (rather than creating a new func for the same) ? Or is it better to leave
>>getnstimeofday as it is ?
> 
> 
> No, getnstimeofday() is very much needed to get a nanosecond grained
> wall-time clock, so a new function is needed for the monotonic clock.
> 
> In my timeofday re-work I have used the name "get_monotonic_clock()" and
> "get_monotonic_clock_ts()" for basically the same functionality
> (providing a ktime and a timespec respectively). You might consider
> naming it as such, but resolving these naming collisions shouldn't be
> too difficult either way.

Indeed.  Lets use a name with "monotonic" in it, please.  And, 
possibly not "clock".  How about get_nsmonotonic_time() or some such?


-- 
George Anzinger   george@mvista.com
HRT (High-res-timers):  http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/

  reply	other threads:[~2005-12-13  0:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-12-07 22:08 [RFC][Patch 0/5] Per-task delay accounting Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:13 ` [RFC][Patch 1/5] nanosecond timestamps and diffs Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-12 18:50   ` [Lse-tech] " Christoph Lameter
2005-12-12 19:31     ` Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-12 19:49       ` john stultz
2005-12-12 20:00         ` Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-12 20:07           ` john stultz
2005-12-13  0:54             ` George Anzinger [this message]
2005-12-13  3:48               ` Nish Aravamudan
2005-12-13 18:35         ` Jay Lan
2005-12-13 21:16           ` john stultz
2005-12-13 21:44           ` Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-13 22:13             ` George Anzinger
2005-12-13 23:05           ` [ckrm-tech] " Matt Helsley
2005-12-07 22:15 ` [RFC][Patch 2/5] Per-task delay accounting: Initialization, dynamic turn on/off Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:23 ` [RFC][Patch 3/5] Per-task delay accounting: Sync block I/O delays Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:33   ` [ckrm-tech] " Dave Hansen
2005-12-07 23:06     ` Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:28 ` [RFC][Patch 4/5] Per-task delay accounting: Swap in delays Shailabh Nagar
2005-12-07 22:29 ` [RFC][Patch 5/5] Per-task delay accounting: procfs interface Shailabh Nagar

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=439E1BBE.4040405@mvista.com \
    --to=george@mvista.com \
    --cc=axboe@suse.de \
    --cc=ckrm-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
    --cc=elsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=guillaume.thouvenin@bull.net \
    --cc=jlan@sgi.com \
    --cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=nagar@watson.ibm.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