Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

opal/timer: add code to check if rtdtsc is core invariant #2599

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 19, 2016

Conversation

hjelmn
Copy link
Member

@hjelmn hjelmn commented Dec 17, 2016

Newer x86 processors have a core invariant tsc. On these systems it is
safe to use the rtdtsc instruction as a monotonic timer. This commit
adds a new function to the opal timer code to check if the timer
backend is monotonic. On x86 it checks the appropriate bit and on
other architectures it parrots back the OPAL_TIMER_MONOTONIC value.

(cherry picked from commit a718743)

Signed-off-by: Nathan Hjelm hjelmn@lanl.gov

Newer x86 processors have a core invariant tsc. On these systems it is
safe to use the rtdtsc instruction as a monotonic timer. This commit
adds a new function to the opal timer code to check if the timer
backend is monotonic. On x86 it checks the appropriate bit and on
other architectures it parrots back the OPAL_TIMER_MONOTONIC value.

(cherry picked from commit a718743)

Signed-off-by: Nathan Hjelm <hjelmn@lanl.gov>
@hjelmn
Copy link
Member Author

hjelmn commented Dec 17, 2016

@rhc54 This fixes as performance regression found in 1.10.3 that is cause LANL codes problems. The fix doesn't help with all Intel processors but helps with the latest iterations. I am working on a more complete fix but we need a 1.10.5 on Monday or Tuesday if possible.

@rhc54
Copy link
Contributor

rhc54 commented Dec 17, 2016

can you get someone to review this by then?

@hjelmn
Copy link
Member Author

hjelmn commented Dec 17, 2016

@rhc54 Sure. If George can't get to it I will see who I can find.

@rhc54
Copy link
Contributor

rhc54 commented Dec 19, 2016

Fixes #2591

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants