Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932186AbWCUJGf (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2006 04:06:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751170AbWCUJGf (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2006 04:06:35 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:24758 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751123AbWCUJGe (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2006 04:06:34 -0500 Subject: Re: gettimeofday order of magnitude slower with pmtimer, which is default From: Arjan van de Ven To: Andreas Mohr Cc: Con Kolivas , OGAWA Hirofumi , bert hubert , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, george@mvista.com In-Reply-To: <20060321085352.GA17642@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de> References: <20060320122449.GA29718@outpost.ds9a.nl> <1142901656.441f4b98472e5@vds.kolivas.org> <87acbk33la.fsf@duaron.myhome.or.jp> <200603211409.50331.kernel@kolivas.org> <20060321085352.GA17642@rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 10:06:27 +0100 Message-Id: <1142931987.3077.50.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1297 Lines: 32 On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 09:53 +0100, Andreas Mohr wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 02:09:50PM +1100, Con Kolivas wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 01:59 pm, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > > > Yes. However, if machines uses buggy chip, I guessed TSC/PIT would be > > > more proper as time source. > > > > Oh yes but there has been an epidemic of timer problems (fast/slow, lost ticks > > etc) lately meaning the pm timer is being relied upon more and more. > > I think it's reasonable to question whether to use unlikely or not, > but IMHO omitting unlikely here will not reward well-behaving systems and > not punish buggy systems, and this doesn't seem quite right from an > evolutionary point of view rdtsc is not reliable for any SMP system or any system doing frequency scaling or C3 state power saving states. (exception is newest generation processors where that appears to be changing now) You can say "but it appears to work on my SMP system".. but are they still synced after 200 days of uptime? or are they skewed by then by too much. - 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/