[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Q: sched_clock() vs. clocksource, how to implement correctly
On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 18:29 +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > Questions:
> >
> > - Isn't sched_clock() supposed to be extended to 64bit so
> > that it practically never wraps?
> > (old implementations use cnt32_to_63())
> Yes, sched_clock() is supposed to return a monotonic timestamp.
> > - What would be the effect on scheduling when sched_clock() wraps?
> It would confuse the process accounting and the scheduling I guess.

Are you sure about this? I'm pretty sure I've seen Ingo say multiple
times that sched_clock can wrap, and can be unstable. For instance
sched_clock is (was?) directly connected to the TSC on x86 ..

If it really can't wrap there must bunches of architectures that would
need to be fixed up.


 \ /
  Last update: 2010-04-27 01:51    [W:0.068 / U:5.828 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site