Re: [PATCH] sched: Support current clocksource handling in fallback sched_clock().
From: Linus Walleij
Date: Tue May 26 2009 - 10:32:15 EST
2009/5/26 Paul Mundt <lethal@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> unsigned long long __attribute__((weak)) sched_clock(void)
> + /*
> + * Use the current clocksource when it becomes available later in
> + * the boot process, and ensure that it has a high enough rating
> + * to make it suitable for general use.
> + */
> + if (clock && clock->rating >= 100)
> + return cyc2ns(clock, clocksource_read(clock));
> + /* Otherwise just fall back on jiffies */
> return (unsigned long long)(jiffies - INITIAL_JIFFIES)
> * (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ);
This seems like it would make the patch I sent the other day
unnecessary (subject u300 sched_clock() implementation).
It would also trim off this solution found in all OMAP platforms in
BUT Peter Zijlstra replied to my question about why this wasn't
> But that is the reason this isn't generic, non of the 'stable'
> clocksources on x86 are fast enough to use as sched_clock.
Does that mean clock->rating for these clocksources is
for certain < 100?
The definition of "rating" from the kerneldoc does not
seem to imply that, it's a subjective measure AFAICT.
Else you might want an additional criteria, like
cyc2ns(1) (much less than) jiffies_to_usecs(1)*1000
(however you do that the best way)
so you don't pick something
that isn't substantially faster than the jiffy counter atleast?
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/