On 25/04/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wednesday 25 April 2007 22:42:44 Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> > Timing information is broken
> >
>
> This looks like Andi's sched_clock stuff hitting: it returns an
> inherently per-cpu result, so using it for printk timestamps isn't very
> useful.
It should actually roughly work. There can be some drift, but there shouldn't
be that much error. All CPUs should tick at roughly the same rate because
it's scaled to nanoseconds
If the drift is a big issue it would also be possible to resync every minute
or so, but I haven't implemented that.
There will be always some minor monotonicities because it won't try
to stop the CPU from reordering instructions.
I don't know why it is that off in your case.
Maybe because it's P4 HT?
Regards,
Michal
--
Michal K. K. Piotrowski
LTG - Linux Testers Group (PL)
(http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/ltg/)
LTG - Linux Testers Group (EN)
(http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/linux_testers_group_en/)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
