archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: MONTET Julien via lttng-dev <>
To: "" <>
Subject: [lttng-dev] LTTng - Xenomai : different results between timestamp-lttng and rt_time_read()
Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 07:58:20 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2178 bytes --]

Hi the developers !

I am currently working on a Raspberry pi 3B with Xenomai and LTTng tools.
Raspbian 10.9 Buster - kernel 4.19.85
uname -a : Linux raspberrypi 4.19.85-v7+ #5 SMP PREEMPT Wed May 12 10:13:37
Both tools are working, but I wonder about the accuracy of LTTng libraries.

The code used is quite simple, it is written with the alchemy skin.
A rt_task_spawn calls a function that has rt_task_set_periodic(NULL, TM_NOW, period) and rt_task_wait_period(NULL).
->The rt_task_set_periodic is based on 1ms.
->The  rt_task_wait_period(NULL) is of course inside a while loop (see below at the very end).

My goal is to get accurate traces from Xenomai.
I took two methods to do so :
-> lttng
-> basic calculation based on  rt_timer_read()

What a surprise when I found both method have two different results.
-> LTTng shows me traces [0.870;1.13] ms (or even less precise)
-> rt_time_read shows me traces [0.980;1.020] ms

Thing to note :
-> The use of LTTng has no influence on rt_time_read(), you can use both methods at the same time.

Then, I saved the output of rt_time_read inside a tracepoint.
It appeared the LTTng is always called at the right time because the value got by rt_time_read () is really good.

These are now my questions :
- What is the method I should trust ?
- I have searched on the forum and I found LTTng uses a MONOTONIC clock for the timestamp. Can/Should I modify it ?

A small part of my function called by rt_task_spawn :
    RTIME period = 1000*1000; // in ns
    RTIME now;
    RTIME previous = 0;
    RTIME duration;
        overruns = 0;
        err = rt_task_wait_period(&overruns);
        now = rt_timer_read();
        tracepoint(tp_provider, tracepoint_tick_ms, now, "tick");

        if (previous != 0)
            rt_printf("%llu\n \n", duration/1000);



[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 8380 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 156 bytes --]

lttng-dev mailing list

             reply	other threads:[~2021-05-20  7:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-20  7:58 MONTET Julien via lttng-dev [this message]
2021-05-20  8:20 ` Norbert Lange via lttng-dev
2021-05-20  8:28   ` MONTET Julien via lttng-dev
2021-05-20  9:11     ` Norbert Lange via lttng-dev
2021-05-20 13:54       ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-05-20 13:56         ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-05-20 15:09           ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-05-20 15:34             ` Jan Kiszka via lttng-dev
2021-05-20 15:39             ` Norbert Lange via lttng-dev
2021-05-21 10:13               ` MONTET Julien via lttng-dev
2021-05-25  8:46                 ` Norbert Lange via lttng-dev

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [lttng-dev] LTTng - Xenomai : different results between timestamp-lttng and rt_time_read()' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

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).