On Tue, 2013-04-02 at 08:54 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 11:29 -0700, John Stultz wrote: > > I'm still not sold on the CLOCK_PERF posix clock. The semantics are > > still too hand-wavy and implementation specific. > > How about we define the semantics as: match whatever comes out of perf > (and preferably ftrace by default) stuff?
My thought exactly. Maybe if we defined it as "CLOCK_TRACE" and had equivalent "trace_clock()" function used by both perf (instead of perf_clock()) and ftrace the semantics would became clearer? This clock could be then described as "source of timestamps used by Linux trace infrastructure, in particular by ftrace and perf". Paweł -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
