Mirror of the lttng-dev mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: gausinghnsit@gmail.com (Gaurav Singh)
Subject: [ltt-dev] Timestamping for ARM
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 11:42:08 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3cc7a0df0810142312k70a351ccq85e88d8b075d900f@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080922162046.GA5175@Krystal>

Hi Matheiu/All,

I have managed to supply a timer to LTTng on my ST Nomadik (ARM based
chip) 8815 board. Luckily there are timers that I can use.
I am using another custom designed tool to find times for interrupt
handlers and bottom halves. After using the new timer for timestamping
I am getting similar results in LTT which probably proves the working
of the method.
However are there any other tests I can use to verify the working?
Also interrupt handler times are wrong using the LTTV version
(lttv-0.10.0-pre11-10032008). The patch supplied earlier is giving me
the correct times. Is the patch correct? What is the status of the
Interrupt handler time plugin in LTTV? I see that I have to load it
seperately - does that mean it is not fully supported?


Regards
Gaurav

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 9:50 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers
<compudj at krystal.dyndns.org> wrote:
> Yeah, generic timestamping in LTTng is just a simple event counter and
> does not reflect the time elapsed between events.
>
> Sure, you can use a different time source if your specific ARM board
> supports it. It's just a matter of looking at what a patch like
> lttng-timestamp-powerpc.patch does for powerpc and do the same for ARM.
> You'll probably want to refer to your arch-specific documentation to
> find out if you have an high-precision fast time source available which
> is synchronised across CPUs.
>
> If you do it correctly (with the right ifdefs and HAVE_* dependency), I
> could pull this patch into LTTng so arm boards which have such time
> source could have such timing information.
>
> That said, it might be good to extend arch/arm/include/asm/timex.h to
> make get_cycles() support your timestamp on your specific board...
>
> Mathieu
>
> * Gaurav Singh (gausinghnsit at gmail.com) wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I am using an ARM based CPU. Using generic timestamping is giving
>> wrong time taken information as it shows most of the time taken in the
>> timer inteerupt handler. Is there any other way to present the correct
>> timestamping information. As I understand we can use another clock
>> source to provide timestamps.
>>
>> Regards
>> Gaurav Singh
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ltt-dev mailing list
>> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>>
>
> --
> Mathieu Desnoyers
> OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
>



       reply	other threads:[~2008-10-15  6:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <3cc7a0df0809220302i186b5227l54579e58816c016a@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found] ` <20080922162046.GA5175@Krystal>
2008-10-15  6:12   ` Gaurav Singh [this message]
2008-10-15 14:04     ` Mathieu Desnoyers

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3cc7a0df0810142312k70a351ccq85e88d8b075d900f@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=gausinghnsit@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox