From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6][RFC] Rework vsyscall to avoid truncation/rounding issue in timekeeping core
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 10:31:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1348151508.13080.66.camel@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrX5vXTZr_CNfCFDss7XG2PioxMqtpMTuYvoq7-ip2NNbA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 16:49 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I haven't looked in any great detail, but the approach looks sensible
> and should slow down the vsyscall code.
>
> That being said, as long as you're playing with this, here are a
> couple thoughts:
>
> 1. The TSC-reading code does this:
>
> ret = (cycle_t)vget_cycles();
>
> last = VVAR(vsyscall_gtod_data).clock.cycle_last;
>
> if (likely(ret >= last))
> return ret;
>
> I haven't specifically benchmarked the cost of that branch, but I
> suspect it's a fairly large fraction of the total cost of
> vclock_gettime. IIUC, the point is that there might be a few cycles
> worth of clock skew even on systems with otherwise usable TSCs, and we
> don't want a different CPU to return complete garbage if the cycle
> count is just below cycle_last.
>
> A different formulation would avoid the problem: set cycle_last to,
> say, 100ms *before* the time of the last update_vsyscall, and adjust
> the wall_time, etc variables accordingly. That way a few cycles (or
> anything up to 100ms) or skew won't cause an overflow. Then you could
> kill that branch.
>
I'm curious... If the task gets preempted after reading ret, and doesn't
get to run again for another 200ms, would that break it?
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-20 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-17 22:04 [PATCH 0/6][RFC] Rework vsyscall to avoid truncation/rounding issue in timekeeping core John Stultz
2012-09-17 22:04 ` [PATCH 1/6][RFC] time: Move timekeeper structure to timekeeper_internal.h for vsyscall changes John Stultz
2012-09-17 22:04 ` [PATCH 2/6][RFC] time: Move update_vsyscall definitions to timekeeper_internal.h John Stultz
2012-09-27 3:14 ` Paul Mackerras
2012-09-17 22:04 ` [PATCH 3/6][RFC] time: Convert CONFIG_GENERIC_TIME_VSYSCALL to CONFIG_GENERIC_TIME_VSYSCALL_OLD John Stultz
2012-09-27 3:14 ` Paul Mackerras
2012-09-17 22:04 ` [PATCH 4/6][RFC] time: Introduce new GENERIC_TIME_VSYSCALL John Stultz
2012-09-17 22:05 ` [PATCH 5/6][RFC] time: Only do nanosecond rounding on GENERIC_TIME_VSYSCALL_OLD systems John Stultz
2012-09-17 22:05 ` [PATCH 6/6][RFC] time: Convert x86_64 to using new update_vsyscall John Stultz
2012-09-17 23:49 ` [PATCH 0/6][RFC] Rework vsyscall to avoid truncation/rounding issue in timekeeping core Andy Lutomirski
2012-09-18 0:20 ` John Stultz
2012-09-18 0:43 ` Andy Lutomirski
2012-09-18 18:02 ` Richard Cochran
2012-09-18 18:17 ` Andy Lutomirski
2012-09-18 18:29 ` John Stultz
2012-09-19 4:50 ` Richard Cochran
2012-09-19 5:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2012-09-19 16:31 ` John Stultz
2012-09-19 17:03 ` Richard Cochran
2012-09-19 17:54 ` John Stultz
2012-09-19 18:26 ` Andy Lutomirski
2012-09-19 20:50 ` Luck, Tony
2012-09-19 21:11 ` John Stultz
2012-09-20 7:36 ` Richard Cochran
2012-09-19 21:15 ` Andy Lutomirski
2012-09-20 14:31 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2012-09-20 17:32 ` Andy Lutomirski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1348151508.13080.66.camel@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).