On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 06:16:53PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Quoting r. Grant Grundler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Patch below adds "-g" (gettimeofday) and "-M=<CPU Mhz>" parameters > > in case someone's firmware is less accurate than HP's. > > I dont think we shall care about that until this comes about.
Shirley Ma (IBM) has asserted that was the case for machines she was testing on. That's what started this email thread. Shirley, did the patch to get_clock.c fix the problem? > Maybe there shall be a separate utility to compare > get_cycles and gettimeofday results, may be useful for debug. > > Anyway, if get_cpu_mhz isnt reliable people can just dump raw > cycles data and do the math outside the tool. Yeah, that's a valid alternative. And the extra code doesn't make this a better example. OTOH, it's more convenient to have the math integrated in the test - one less step that can introduce errors. Any one else have an opinion? Shirley? thanks, grant _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
