From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jun  3 06:03:59 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6B6106564A;
	Fri,  3 Jun 2011 06:03:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 851C68FC15;
	Fri,  3 Jun 2011 06:03:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua
	[212.40.38.100])
	by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id JAA07176;
	Fri, 03 Jun 2011 09:03:56 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
	by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD))
	id 1QSNUC-0000bw-HZ; Fri, 03 Jun 2011 09:03:56 +0300
Message-ID: <4DE8794B.60100@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 09:03:55 +0300
From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110503 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201105241356.45543.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
	<201105311616.31256.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
	<4DE5D0D1.1030903@FreeBSD.org>
	<201106011655.51233.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <201106011655.51233.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Enabling invariant TSC timecounter on SMP
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 06:03:59 -0000

on 01/06/2011 23:55 Jung-uk Kim said the following:
> Yes, it's still a work-in-progress.  However, I thought it is good 
> enough for 9.0 inclusion.  BTW, the latest patch is here:
> 
> http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/tsc_smp_test5.diff
> 
> FYI, the only meaningful change from the previous version is that it's 
> limited to AMD single-socket Bulldozer platforms and Intel Core and 
> later platforms.  We may add more quirks if needed, of course.

Looks good, but I think that the check is a little bit unfair to AMD Family 10h+
CPUs.  Although TSCs in those CPUs are per core I've never seen them drift out
of sync if they started with the same value.

[snip]

> Consecutive RDTSCs used on a same CPU is always incremental but we 
> cannot 100% guarantee that on two cores, even if TSC is derived from 
> the same clock.  I am hoping at least latency difference (I believe 
> it's about few tens of cycles max) is "eaten up" by lowering 
> resolution.  It's not perfect but it's better than serialization 
> (Linux) or heuristics (OpenSolaris), just because there are few rare 
> conditions to consider.  Thoughts?

I am still not sure which case this code should solve.

Thread T1: x1 = rdtsc() on CPU1;
Thread T1: x2 = rdtsc() on CPU2;
x2 < x1 ?
Or?

-- 
Andriy Gapon