Re: Unified tracing buffer

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008, Martin Bligh wrote:

> >> > Yup, explains your TSC observation. Nothing we can do about. Broken by
> >> > system design :( Welcome in the wonderful world of Inhell/BIOS/ACPI !
> >>
> >> We have linux patches that sync the TSC on exit_idle. I'll see if I can get
> >> Michael to send them out.
> >
> > Are you sure that they sync it precicely enough that there is no user
> > space observable way of time going backwards between cores ?
> 
> I think the tolerance is about 500 cycles. If that's not sufficient, I guess
> we'll have to either live with some slight misordering (which people have
> pointed out is kind of inevitable anyway) on these broken machines?
> It was sufficient for what we were using it for, but maybe not for everyone.

Well, I dont care about the trace reordering at all. I care about user
space visible time going backwards issues observed via the
gettimeofday vsyscall. 500 cycles should be fine, I doubt that we can
migrate in less than that :)

I guess you try this only for machines where the TSC runs with
constant frequency, right ?

Looking forward to your patches.

Thanks,

	tglx


 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/