From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753252AbcIBMlm (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 2 Sep 2016 08:41:42 -0400
Received: from mail-ua0-f179.google.com ([209.85.217.179]:36616 "EHLO
        mail-ua0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752132AbcIBMlk (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 2 Sep 2016 08:41:40 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAA93ih3k+f-gSMqbmU_TPBs7rzwy9gRDaGNh_ZNofw1H63N83g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1472552924-22297-1-git-send-email-binoy.jayan@linaro.org>
 <1472552924-22297-4-git-send-email-binoy.jayan@linaro.org> <CAA93ih3k+f-gSMqbmU_TPBs7rzwy9gRDaGNh_ZNofw1H63N83g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Binoy Jayan <binoy.jayan@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 18:11:39 +0530
Message-ID: <CAHv-k_9AP1k6baG6P3VRTcAGsP4GP3Vn7vvqCw+7b6ZFe9TM5w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] tracing: Histogram for missed timer offsets
To: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu@linaro.org>
Cc: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 30 August 2016 at 16:20, Masami Hiramatsu
<masami.hiramatsu@linaro.org> wrote:
> Hi Binoy,
>>
>> +static inline void trace_latency_hrtimer_mark_ts(struct hrtimer *timer,
>> +                                        struct hrtimer_clock_base *new_base,
>> +                                        ktime_t tim)
>> +{
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_TRACER) || defined(CONFIG_IRQSOFF_TRACER)
>> +       if (trace_latency_hrtimer_interrupt_enabled()) {
>
> You would better use unlikely() here.
>
>> +               ktime_t now = new_base->get_time();
>> +
>> +               if (ktime_to_ns(tim) < ktime_to_ns(now))
>
> Wouldn't we need to consider the case of wrap around?
>
>> +                       timer->praecox = now;
>> +               else
>> +                       timer->praecox = ktime_set(0, 0);
>> +       }
>> +#endif
>> +}

Hi Masami,

I always see these values to be relative and not absolute time. I
found 'praecox' to be always zero during test.
What do you think.

Binoy