From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sched_clock() uses are broken
Date: 02 May 2006 18:43:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <p73slns5qda.fsf@bragg.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060502132953.GA30146@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:
>
> However, this is not the case. On x86 with TSC, it returns a 54 bit
> number. This means that when t1 < t0, time_passed_ns becomes a very
> large number which no longer represents the amount of time.
Good point. For a 1Ghz system this would happen every ~0.57 years.
The problem is there is AFAIK no non destructive[1] way to find out how
many bits the TSC has
Destructive would be to overwrite it with -1 and see how many stick.
> All uses in kernel/sched.c seem to be aflicted by this problem.
>
> There are several solutions to this - the most obvious being that we
> need a function which returns the nanosecond difference between two
> sched_clock() return values, and this function needs to know how to
> handle the case where sched_clock() has wrapped.
Ok it can be done with a simple test.
>
> IOW:
>
> t0 = sched_clock();
> /* do something */
> t1 = sched_clock();
>
> time_passed = sched_clock_diff(t1, t0);
>
> Comments?
Agreed it's a problem, but probably a small one. At worst you'll get
a small scheduling hickup every half year, which should be hardly
that big an issue.
Might chose to just ignore it with a big fat comment?
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-02 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-02 13:29 sched_clock() uses are broken Russell King
2006-05-02 14:21 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-02 16:43 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2006-05-02 16:50 ` Russell King
2006-05-02 17:01 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-02 17:18 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-02 18:55 ` Russell King
2006-05-02 19:05 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-02 19:08 ` Russell King
2006-05-02 19:23 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-02 21:35 ` Russell King
2006-05-02 17:15 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-04 3:50 ` George Anzinger
2006-05-04 14:18 ` Nicolas Pitre
2006-05-02 16:54 ` Christopher Friesen
2006-05-02 16:59 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-02 17:07 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-03 7:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-03 7:40 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-03 9:11 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-03 9:16 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-03 9:31 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-07 12:33 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 12:43 ` Russell King
2006-05-07 12:56 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 13:00 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 13:18 ` Russell King
2006-05-07 13:30 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 13:55 ` Russell King
2006-05-07 14:04 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-07 16:03 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-07 16:53 ` Russell King
2006-05-07 17:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-07 17:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-07 17:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-08 4:14 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-08 4:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-08 4:46 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-08 5:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-05-08 5:30 ` Nick Piggin
2006-05-04 20:02 ` Florian Paul Schmidt
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=p73slns5qda.fsf@bragg.suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
/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