lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Whats the purpose of get_cycles_sync()
Hi Andi,

On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 09:21:02PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> "Joerg Roedel" <joerg.roedel@amd.com> writes:
>
> > I would like to answer what the special purpose of the get_cycles_sync()
> > function is in the x86 architecture. In special I ask myself why
> > this function has to be *sync*?
>
> Vojtech had one test that tested time monotonicity over CPUs
> and it constantly failed until we added the CPUID on K8 C stepping.
> He can give details on the test.

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that.

> I suspect the reason was because the CPU reordered the RDTSCs so that
> a later RDTSC could return a value before an earlier one. This can
> happen because gettimeofday() is so fast that a tight loop calling it can
> fit more than one iteration into the CPU's reordering window.

Ok, that is the reason why the get_cycles_sync() function only exists on
x86_64 and not on i386, because on i386 gettimeofday() is a real
syscall?

> That is why newer kernels use RDTSCP if available which doesn't need
> to be intercepted and is synchronous. And since all AMD SVM systems
> have RDTSCP they are fine.

The problem with KVM here is that they wan't to migrate guests between
Intel and AMD boxes. So they don't export RDTSCP or FEATURE_SYNC_TSC to
the guests in the CPUID calls. A 64bit Linux guest will execute the
CPUID in that function.

Joerg
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-10-31 11:21    [W:0.056 / U:0.848 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site