Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 6 Dec 2010 14:27:36 -0500
From:      Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: non-invariant tsc and cputicker
Message-ID:  <201012061429.08085.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <4CFD34E1.40008@freebsd.org>
References:  <4CF92852.20705@freebsd.org> <201012061401.17904.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <4CFD34E1.40008@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 06 December 2010 02:09 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 06/12/2010 21:01 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
> > :-) Don't get me wrong, I generally agree with you *iff* it does
> > : not
> >
> > hurt too much.  Anyway, this issue should be resolved from the
> > root, i.e., kern_resouce.c, if possible.
>
> But what to resolve there?

Better algorithm for stat.

> I just want to always have a stable source "cpu ticks", and then
> everything else should just work?

If we had one, yes.  But we don't, at least for old x86 hardware. :-(

> BTW, if someone comes up with a patch for more or less correct
> accounting when "cpu ticks" frequency is allowed to change, then I
> am all for it. But, IMO, it's just easier to use stable "cpu
> ticks".

If it doesn't hurt too much, yes.  Remember the P-state invariant CPUs 
are pretty new.  SMP-correct TSC is quite rare if there is any.

Jung-uk Kim



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201012061429.08085.jkim>