Re: [PATCH] U300 sched_clock implementation
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Mon May 25 2009 - 09:02:19 EST
On Mon, 2009-05-25 at 14:13 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2009/5/24 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 23:46 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> This overrides the global sched_clock() symbol in the Linux
> >> scheduler with a local implementation which takes advantage of
> >> the timesource in U300 giving a scheduling resolution of 1us. The
> >> solution is the same as found in the OMAP2 core code.
> > We assume sched_clock() to return time in ns (e-9) resolution.
> Yep okay and in this case:
> >> + ret = (unsigned long long) u300_get_cycles();
> >> + ret = (ret * clocksource_u300_1mhz.mult_orig) >>
> >> + clocksource_u300_1mhz.shift;
> >> + return ret;
> (mult_orig >> shift) == 1000
Ah, ok -- missed that little detail ;-)
> So for each cycle in cyclecount register we return 1000 * cycles
> i.e 1000ns.
> If it looks nicer we can of course simply:
> return (unsigned long long) u300_get_cycles * 1000;
> But the question here is whether this resolution is enough for
> sched_clock() or if it is irrelevant to override sched_clock()
> if it cannot schedule with better precision than 1000 ns.
No anything better than jiffies is good, 1us certainly is worth the
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/