lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: slow nanosleep?
FromPeter Zijlstra <>
DateWed, 08 Sep 2010 15:00:18 +0200
On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 14:43 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > However nanosleep with 1 ns and prctl(PR_SET_TIMERSLACK, 1) takes
> > about 8 us on x86(Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8500 @ 3.16GHz)
> > and 20 us on my slower ppc board. Is that system call overhead
> > or possibly some error?
>
> That's overhead I fear. We go way up to enqueue/arm the timer until we
> figure out that the timeout already happened.

Well, there's also the fact that his ppc board is simply dead slow,
using the freq ratio: 3166/266 you'd expect (at a similar ins/clock
ratio) the ppc to take 95us.

So in fact the pcc taking 20us is actually quite good.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-09-08 15:03    [from the cache]
©2003-2010