From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25796 invoked by alias); 26 Apr 2009 12:07:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 25788 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Apr 2009 12:07:44 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:07:36 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3QC7Yv6031375 for ; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 08:07:34 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n3QC7X1q006090; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 08:07:33 -0400 Received: from [10.32.10.26] (vpn-10-26.str.redhat.com [10.32.10.26]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3QC7Vej015364; Sun, 26 Apr 2009 08:07:32 -0400 Subject: Re: Some test results on i386 and x86_64 From: Mark Wielaard To: Masami Hiramatsu Cc: systemtap@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <49F262E8.7080608@redhat.com> References: <1240507445.2338.80.camel@fedora.wildebeest.org> <49F0C3B9.5000207@redhat.com> <1240516075.2338.129.camel@fedora.wildebeest.org> <49F262E8.7080608@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 12:07:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1240747650.3463.5.camel@hermans.wildebeest.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-q2/txt/msg00439.txt.bz2 Hi Masami, On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 21:10 -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > Mark Wielaard wrote: > > On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 15:38 -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> Mark Wielaard wrote: > >>> On x86_64: > >>> FAIL: flightrec2 (log file numbers (2, 2)) > >>> FAIL: flightrec2 (log file size (4)) > >> Thanks! > >> Could you give me a part of systemtap.log? > > > > Attached. > > Hmm, it seems that timer.ms(1) was not kicked so frequently > on xen-kernel. > --- > 1000 flightlog.out.0 > 100 flightlog.out.1 > --- > 1000 flightlog.out.0 > 920 flightlog.out.1 > --- > > Perhaps, timer resolution on xen-kernel may be 10ms or more? Yes, seems it counts "slower". On my non-xen i386 machine (2.6.27.21-170.2.56.fc10.i686): $ stap -e 'global count=0; probe timer.ms(1) { printf("%d: %d\n", gettimeofday_ms(), count++); if (count > 10) exit(); }' 1240747341878: 0 1240747341879: 1 1240747341880: 2 1240747341881: 3 1240747341882: 4 1240747341883: 5 1240747341884: 6 1240747341885: 7 1240747341886: 8 1240747341887: 9 1240747341888: 10 But on my xen enabled x86_64 machine (2.6.18-128.1.6.el5xen): $ stap -e 'global count=0; probe timer.ms(1) { printf("%d: %d\n", gettimeofday_ms(), count++); if (count > 10) exit(); }' 1240747430504: 0 1240747430504: 1 1240747430514: 2 1240747430514: 3 1240747430524: 4 1240747430524: 5 1240747430524: 6 1240747430534: 7 1240747430534: 8 1240747430544: 9 1240747430544: 10 Cheers, Mark