lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateSun, 9 Sep 2007 19:31:48 +0100
FromArjan van de Ven <>
SubjectRe: tsc timer related problems/questions
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 20:17:28 +0200 (CEST)
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@computergmbh.de> wrote:

>
> On Sep 9 2007 17:49, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>
> >> Question: Why are only Intel CPUs considered as stable? Could
> >> there be implemented a more sophisticated heuristic, that actually
> >> does some tests for tsc stability?
> >
> >on AMD multi-socket systems, afaik the tsc is not synchronized
> >between packages. On Intel the tsc is derived from the FSB which is
> >shared between the packages.
>
> Also, the TSC is not necessarily constant wrt. CPU clock speed.
> If your program stalls, the core may reduce frequency and hence
> TSC values are not linear to time anymore.
>

that depends on the CPU generation; most current cpus have
constant-rate tscs (at least constant wrt their own concept of time,
but at least independent of cpu frequency)...

it gets more iffy on idle; on deep idle the tsc tends to stop ;(
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-09-09 20:35    [from the cache]
©2003-2010