From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HVav4-0001R5-GD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:10:34 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HVav3-0001Ql-2s
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:10:34 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HVav2-0001Qi-TO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:10:32 -0500
Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.168])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <balrogg@gmail.com>) id 1HVasr-00014q-Ha
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:08:17 -0400
Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j40so1632053ugd
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 25 Mar 2007 15:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <fb249edb0703251508m6b96c47v646a0e2c9ade7629@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 00:08:15 +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: <fb249edb0703251507q6085d6dfi13340ecf15693f78@mail.gmail.com>
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>
	<fb249edb0703251507q6085d6dfi13340ecf15693f78@mail.gmail.com>
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

On 26/03/07, andrzej zaborowski <balrog@zabor.org> wrote:
> 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.

(I wanted to say MHz)

>
> >  }
> >  #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
>