On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 15:12 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 19:16 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > I think you are mistaken here; the two are similar but not > > > identical. > > > > > > I see sched_clock() as fast first, accurate second. Whereas the > > > clocksource thing is accurate first, fast second. > > > > This is true .. However, if there is a speed different it's small. > > Ugh. Have you ever compared pmtimer (or even hpet) against TSC based > sched_clock()? What you write is so wrong that it's not even funny. You > keep repeating this nonsense despite having been told multiple times > that you are dead wrong.
Yes I have, and your right there is a difference, and a big difference .. Above I was referring only to the TSC clocksource, since that's an apples to apples comparison .. I would never compare the TSC to the acpi_pm, that's no contest .. The acpi_pm as sched_clock() with hackbench was about %25 slower, the pit was 10x slower approximately. (I did this months ago.) Daniel - 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/
