From: "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC/HACK] x86: Fast return to kernel
Date: Sun, 04 May 2014 15:01:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5366B8C8.3080700@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxA522TJ8ROr0AJMusvYitm2RntBfBNXAK1eych3TP=dw@mail.gmail.com>
On 05/04/2014 02:31 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 12:59 PM, H. Peter Anvin <h.peter.anvin@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe let userspace sit in a tight loop doing RDTSC, and look for data
>> points too far apart to have been uninterrupted?
>
> That won't work, since Andy's patch improves on the "interrupt
> happened in kernel space", not on the user-space interrupt case.
>
I was thinking about your proposal, not Andy's.
> But some variation on that with a kernel module that does something like
>
> - take over one CPU and force tons of timer interrupts on that CPU
> using the local APIC
>
> - for (say) ten billion cycles, do something like this in that kernel module:
>
> #define TEN_BILLION (10000000000)
>
> unsigned long prev = 0, sum = 0, end = rdtsc() + TEN_BILLION;
> for (;;) {
> unsigned long tsc = rdtsc();
> if (tsc > end)
> break;
> if (tsc < prev + 500) {
> sum += tsc - prev;
> }
> prev = tsc;
> }
>
> and see how big a fraction of the 10 billion cycles you capture in
> 'sum'. The bigger the fraction, the less time the timer interrupts
> stole from your CPU.
>
> That "500" is just a random cut-off. Any interrupt will take more than
> that many TSC cycles. So the above basically counts how much
> uninterrupted time that thread gets.
Yes, same idea, but in a kernel module.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-04 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-02 19:04 [RFC/HACK] x86: Fast return to kernel Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-02 19:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 19:50 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-04 18:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-05-04 19:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-04 21:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-04 22:01 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2014-05-02 19:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 20:07 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 20:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-05-02 21:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 21:04 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-02 21:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-02 21:37 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 21:42 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-05-02 21:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 21:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-05-04 23:46 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-05-04 23:49 ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-05-02 20:19 ` Steven Rostedt
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=5366B8C8.3080700@intel.com \
--to=h.peter.anvin@intel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@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