From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HVau7-0000bs-24
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:09:35 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HVau5-0000a6-Ka
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:09:34 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HVau5-0000Zx-Gl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:09:33 -0500
Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.237])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <balrogg@gmail.com>) id 1HVaru-0000u8-9f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:07:18 -0400
Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i20so1438271wra
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 15:07:17 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <fb249edb0703251507q6085d6dfi13340ecf15693f78@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 00:07:16 +0200
From: "andrzej zaborowski" <balrog@zabor.org>
Sender: balrogg@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Patch: cpu-all.h for better cycle counter
In-Reply-To: <20070321023726.GA11696@fries.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20070321023726.GA11696@fries.net>
Reply-To: balrogg@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: todd@fries.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Hi,

On 21/03/07, Todd T. Fries <todd@fries.net> wrote:
> This is relative to the 20070319 snapshot.
>
> --- cpu-all.h.orig      Fri Mar 16 18:58:11 2007
> +++ cpu-all.h   Tue Mar 20 21:14:10 2007
> @@ -1012,13 +1012,22 @@ static inline int64_t cpu_get_real_ticks
>  #endif
>  }
>  #else
> -/* The host CPU doesn't have an easily accessible cycle counter.
> -   Just return a monotonically increasing vlue.  This will be totally wrong,
> -   but hopefully better than nothing.  */
> +# warning non-optimized CPU
> +#include <sys/time.h>
> +#include <time.h>
> +
>  static inline int64_t cpu_get_real_ticks (void)
>  {
> -    static int64_t ticks = 0;
> -    return ticks++;
> +       struct timeval tv;
> +       static int64_t i = 0;
> +       int64_t j;
> +
> +       gettimeofday(&tv, NULL);
> +       do {
> +          j = (tv.tv_sec * (uint64_t) 1000000) + tv.tv_usec;
> +       } while (i == j);
> +       i = j;
> +       return j;

Isn't this an infinite loop? gettimeofday() was left out of the loop.

How about "return j + (ticks++)" instead of the loop? If I understand
correctly it may slow things down to below 1Hz.

>  }
>  #endif
>
> --
> Todd Fries .. todd@fries.net
>
>  _____________________________________________
> |                                             \  1.636.410.0632 (voice)
> | Free Daemon Consulting, LLC                 \  1.405.227.9094 (voice)
> | http://FreeDaemonConsulting.com             \  1.866.792.3418 (FAX)
> | "..in support of free software solutions."  \          250797 (FWD)
> |                                             \
>  \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
>
>               37E7 D3EB 74D0 8D66 A68D  B866 0326 204E 3F42 004A
>                         http://todd.fries.net/pgp.txt
>
>
>
>

Regards,
Andrew