Re: [PATCH 0/2] perf/x86: Add ability to sample TSC
From: John Stultz
Date: Thu Feb 19 2015 - 12:50:27 EST
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 19/02/2015 7:24 p.m., John Stultz wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:11 AM, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> With the advent of switching perf_clock to CLOCK_MONOTONIC,
>>> it will not be possible to convert perf_clock directly to/from
>>> TSC. So add the ability to sample TSC instead.
>>> Adrian Hunter (2):
>>> perf: Sample additional clock value
>>> perf/x86: Provide TSC for PERF_SAMPLE_CLOCK_ARCH
>> This doesn't seem very portable. The CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW clockid was
>> added to provide a arch-neutral abstraction of a free-running hardware
>> counter that isn't affected by adjtimex slewing (though like any
>> counter, it will be affected by non-constant drift).
>> You might consider looking at that if the short term slew adjustments
>> (which result in more accurate timings in the long term) are
>> problematic for you.
> This is for Intel Processor Trace - which Peter has already
> rightly chastised me for not making plain.
> Intel Processor Trace (Intel PT) is a trace that is hardware generated. The
> hardware does not know about linux or its clocks, so the timestamps
> are TSC. I think ARM might have the same issue with ETM or such. i.e. the
> need to synchronize a hardware timestamp with a perf event.
> There is a description of Intel PT in the Intel Architecture manuals.
Cc'ing Mathieu since he might be familiar w/ any similar issues w/ Coresight.
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/