Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755804Ab2KMU7A (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:59:00 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:12797 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753783Ab2KMU67 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:58:59 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=dvhZ+ic4 c=1 sm=0 a=rXTBtCOcEpjy1lPqhTCpEQ==:17 a=mNMOxpOpBa8A:10 a=MbCFXo7hY28A:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=2HxqKFuZ9XIA:10 a=Olpd5A85YGfAUBk8Mi4A:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=rXTBtCOcEpjy1lPqhTCpEQ==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.115.198 Message-ID: <1352840337.18025.43.camel@gandalf.local.home> Subject: Re: [RFC] perf: need to expose sched_clock to correlate user samples with kernel samples From: Steven Rostedt To: John Stultz Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Stephane Eranian , LKML , "mingo@elte.hu" , Paul Mackerras , Anton Blanchard , Will Deacon , "ak@linux.intel.com" , Pekka Enberg , Robert Richter , tglx Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:58:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <509DB632.7070305@linaro.org> References: <1350408232.2336.42.camel@laptop> <509DB632.7070305@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.3-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2056 Lines: 47 On Fri, 2012-11-09 at 18:04 -0800, John Stultz wrote: > On 10/16/2012 10:23 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > I've no problem with adding CLOCK_PERF (or another/better name). > Hrm. I'm not excited about exporting that sort of internal kernel > details to userland. > > The behavior and expectations from sched_clock() has changed over the > years, so I'm not sure its wise to export it, since we'd have to > preserve its behavior from then on. > > Also I worry that it will be abused in the same way that direct TSC > access is, where the seemingly better performance from the more > careful/correct CLOCK_MONOTONIC would cause developers to write fragile > userland code that will break when moved from one machine to the next. > > I'd probably rather perf output timestamps to userland using sane clocks > (CLOCK_MONOTONIC), rather then trying to introduce a new time domain to > userland. But I probably could be convinced I'm wrong. I'm surprised that perf has its own clock anyway. But I would like to export the tracing clocks. We have three (well four) of them: trace_clock_local() which is defined to be a very fast clock but may not be synced with other cpus (basically, it just calls sched_clock). trace_clock() which is not totally serialized, but also not totally off (between local and global). This uses local_clock() which is the same thing that perf_clock() uses. trace_clock_global() which is a monotonic clock across CPUs. It's much slower than the above, but works well when you require synced timestamps. There's also trace_clock_counter() which isn't even a clock :-) It's just a incremental atomic counter that goes up every time it's called. This is the most synced clock, but is absolutely meaningless for timestamps. It's just a way to show ordered events. -- Steve -- 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/