[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       varnish-dev
Subject:    Re: VTIM_real vs VTIM_mono / double vs uint64_t
From:       "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk () phk ! freebsd ! dk>
Date:       2016-04-07 21:25:35
Message-ID: 35155.1460064335 () critter ! freebsd ! dk
[Download RAW message or body]

--------
In message <5706445A.3060506@schokola.de>, Nils Goroll writes:
>Hi,
>
>@Martin, thanks for the VDSO explanations - I knew about this but was not
>up-to-date: because I had once worked on an issue where Linux _did_ syscall for
>clock_gettime, I was surprised to see that my machine doesn't. But my remark on
>this list was superfluous.
>
>On 07/04/16 12:16, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>>> Will still be some
>>> memory reads though, so something based around the Intel in-chip clock
>> 
>> There is no such thing as the "Intel in-chip clock".
>
>I think martin was referring to the TSC.

I think so too, but I wanted to make it absolutely clear that it is
not a "in-chip clock" :-)


-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

_______________________________________________
varnish-dev mailing list
varnish-dev@varnish-cache.org
https://www.varnish-cache.org/lists/mailman/listinfo/varnish-dev
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]