Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 May 2015 20:42:28 -0400 | From | Steven Rostedt <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ftrace: Provide trace clock monotonic raw |
| |
On Tue, 5 May 2015 07:54:46 -0700 Drew Richardson <drew.richardson@arm.com> wrote:
> CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW will advance more constantly than CLOCK_MONOTONIC. > > Imagine someone is trying to optimize a particular program to reduce > instructions executed for a given workload while minimizing the effect > on runtime. Also suppose that ntp is running and potentially making > larger adjustments to CLOCK_MONOTONIC. If ntp is adjusting > CLOCK_MONOTONIC to advance more rapidly, the program will appear to > use fewer instructions per second but run longer than it would if > CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW had been used. The total number of instructions > observed would be the same regardless of the clock source used, but > how it's attributed to time would be affected. > > Conversely if ntp is adjusting CLOCK_MONOTONIC to advance more slowly, > the program will appear to use more instructions per second but run > more quickly. Of course there are many sources that can cause jitter > in performance measurements on modern processors, but I'd like to > remove ntp from the list.
What's the consensus on this patch? Everyone OK with it? If so, can you please post a new patch with the proper change log. And can everyone else give acks. I can take it in my tree.
Thanks,
-- Steve
| |