Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:46:53 +0200 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@csail.mit.edu>, net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Call for performance evaluation: net.isr.direct (fwd) Message-ID: <12349.1129279613@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 13 Oct 2005 19:54:55 EDT." <17230.62415.991707.840932@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <17230.62415.991707.840932@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>, Andrew Gallatin writes: >Linux already takes care of syncing the TSC between SMP cpus, so we >know it is possible. This seems like a much more doable optimization. >And it is likely to have other benefits.. Validating that the TSC is reliable is a nontrivial task which requires access to a lot of NDA information and an extensive positive/negative list of chips and chipsets. Even in the most recent chips, there are still issues with TSC that makes it unusable as a default timecounter. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?12349.1129279613>