RE: [RFC patch 15/15] LTTng timestamp x86
From: Luck, Tony
Date: Fri Oct 17 2008 - 14:59:22 EST
> Hrm, on such systems
> - *large* amount of cpus
> - no synchronized TSCs
> What would be the best approach to order events ?
There isn't a perfect solution for this. My feeling is
that your best hope is with per-cpu buffers logged with
the local TSC ... together with some fancy heuristics to
post-process the logs to come up with the best approximation
to the actual ordering.
If you have a tight upper bound estimate for the
errors in converting from "per-cpu" TSC values to "global
system time" then the post processing tool will be able
to identify events for which the order is uncertain.
> Do you think we should consider using HPET, event though it's
> painfully slow ? Would it be faster than cache-line bouncing
> on such large boxes ? With a frequency around 10MHz, that
> would give a 100ns precision, which should be enough
> to order events.
This sounds like a poor choice. Makes all traces very
slow. 100ns precision isn't all that good ... we can
probably do almost as well estimating the delta between
TSC on different cpus.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/