lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/5] lockstat: core infrastructure
From
Date
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 19:16 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > >From the architecture perspective there are two low level clock hooks to
> > implement one is sched_clock() , and at least one clocksource structure.
> > Both do essentially the same thing. With timekeepings clocksource
> > structure actually being easier to implement cause the math is built in.
>
> I think you are mistaken here; the two are similar but not identical.
>
> I see sched_clock() as fast first, accurate second. Whereas the
> clocksource thing is accurate first, fast second.

This is true .. However, if there is a speed different it's small.
In the past I've replace sched_clock() with a clocksource, and there was
no noticeable speed different .. Just recently I replaced x86's
sched_clock() math with the clocksource math with no noticable
difference .. At least not from my benchmarks ..

> There is room for both of them.

There is room, but we don't need sched_clock() .. Certainly we shouldn't
force architectures to implement sched_clock() by calling it a "bug" if
it's lowres.

Daniel

-
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: 2007-05-30 19:31    [W:0.049 / U:0.708 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site