Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:20:49 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: Thomas Backman <serenity@exscape.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dtrace users opinion solicited (timestamps) Message-ID: <4A563501.1090905@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <D6516CB2-7FEA-4DD2-8177-A694BDABA3C7@exscape.org> References: <4A562960.3010801@freebsd.org> <D6516CB2-7FEA-4DD2-8177-A694BDABA3C7@exscape.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 09/07/2009 21:00 Thomas Backman said the following: > On Jul 9, 2009, at 19:31, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> There are at least the following two alternatives: >> >> 1. Keep things as they are and warn users not to change CPU clock >> frequency when >> they use DTrace and the CPU doesn't have invariant TSC. I think that >> this should >> cause only minor inconveniences to a portion of DTrace users. > Hmm, but "things as they are" causes an overflow about every 10 seconds, > so the value is quite useless now (which, of course, you know about, > having written a patch for it :) This is because of a deficiency in the implementation of the formula, not because of the formula itself. > Is scenario #1 after the patch (PR kern/127441 for the rest of you) or not? Yes, after the patch :) -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A563501.1090905>