On Mon, 2014-09-29 at 16:28 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 03:34:32PM +0100, Pawel Moll wrote:
> > @@ -4456,6 +4459,13 @@ static void __perf_event_header__init_id(struct
> > perf_event_header *header,
> > data->cpu_entry.cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
> > data->cpu_entry.reserved = 0;
> > }
> > +
> > + if (sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_CLOCK_RAW_MONOTONIC) {
> > + struct timespec now;
> > +
> > + getrawmonotonic(&now);
> > + data->clock_raw_monotonic = timespec_to_ns(&now);
> > + }
> > }
> >
>
> This cannot work, getrawmonotonic() isn't NMI-safe and there's
> nothing stopping this being used from NMI context.
>
> Also getrawmonotonic() + timespec_to_ns() will make tglx sad, he's just
> done a tree-wide eradication of silly conversions and now you're adding
> a ns -> timespec -> ns dance right back.
Last thing I want is to make Thomas sad... For obvious reasons ;-)
> I _think_ you want ktime_get_mono_fast_ns(),
With pleasure, it's exactly what I need.
> but this does bring us
> right back to the question/discussion on which timebase you'd want to
> sync again. MONO does make sense for most cases, but I think we've had
> fairly sane stories for people wanting to sync against other clocks.
Yes. I've asked the same question somewhere in the thread.
ftrace has got a switch and a selection of trace_clocks in
kernel/trace/trace.c - do we want something similar (in integer form
probably, though) in perf_events.h with an additional "flag" in struct
perf_event_attr? It could be used to pick a time source for
PERF_SAMPLE_CLOCK (PERF_SAMPLE_TRACE_CLOCK?) sample.
Pawel
--
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/
