From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755603AbYIYXEZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Sep 2008 19:04:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753188AbYIYXER (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Sep 2008 19:04:17 -0400 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:48644 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751651AbYIYXEQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Sep 2008 19:04:16 -0400 Message-ID: <48DC18E9.7000007@goop.org> Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 16:04:09 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steven Rostedt CC: Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Martin Bligh , Peter Zijlstra , Martin Bligh , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Mathieu Desnoyers , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , David Wilder , hch@lst.de, Tom Zanussi , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] Unified trace buffer References: <33307c790809241403w236f2242y18ba44982d962287@mail.gmail.com> <1222339303.16700.197.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <8f3aa8d60809250733q70561e6agfa3b00da83773e9f@mail.gmail.com> <1222354409.16700.215.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <33307c790809250825u567d3680w682899c111e10ed6@mail.gmail.com> <20080925153635.GA12840@elte.hu> <48DBFC7D.4050208@goop.org> <20080925222548.GA28309@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 26 Sep 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> Firstly they need a low-frequency (10khz-100khz) shared clock line >> across all CPUs. A single line - and since it's low frequency it could >> be overlaid on some existing data line and filtered out. That works >> across NUMA nodes as well and physics allows it to be nanosec accurate >> up to dozens of meters or so. >> > > Can this possibly be true? I mean, light travels only one foot every > nanosecond. Can it really keep nanosecond accuracy up to dozens of meters > away? Sure. NTP keeps machines within 1ms (or better) of each other even though the network latency is much higher and jittery. J