From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
peterz@infradead.org, rafael@kernel.org,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] irq: Track the interrupt timings
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 17:38:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57602506.1020007@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1606141105320.1714@knanqh.ubzr>
On 06/14/2016 05:10 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
>> On 06/10/2016 04:52 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>>>> + timings->sum -= timings->values[timings->w_index];
>>>> + timings->values[timings->w_index] = diff;
>>>> + timings->sum += diff;
>>>
>>> Now the real question is whether you really need all that math, checks and
>>> memsets in the irq hotpath. If you make the storage slightly larger then you
>>> can just store the values unconditionally in the circular buffer and do all
>>> the computational stuff when you really it.
>>
>> Yes, that was one concern when I wrote the code: do some basic computation
>> when an interrupt occurs, and the rest after or do the entire math when
>> entering idle.
>>
>> If the storage is a bit larger (let's say 16 values) and there is no memset
>> and the sum is not computed, at least we need a count for the number of values
>> in the array before this one is fulfilled, otherwise the statistics will be
>> wrong as we will take into account the entire array with old values, no ?
>
> The point is not to change from 8 to 16 entries, but to store raw 64-bit
> timestamps instead of computed 32-bit deltas. Whether or not those
> timestamps are too far apart and discarded can be done at idle entry
> time.
Ah, ok. That makes sense.
Thanks for the clarification.
-- Daniel
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-14 15:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-13 11:05 [PATCH V4] irq: Track the interrupt timings Daniel Lezcano
2016-04-22 18:21 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-05-03 13:44 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-06-10 14:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-10 15:11 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-06-10 15:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-10 15:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-06-14 13:36 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-06-14 15:10 ` Nicolas Pitre
2016-06-14 15:38 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2016-06-14 16:36 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=57602506.1020007@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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