Karl Reichert wrote:
> Hmm ... what is the difference between rt_timer_read, rt_timer_inquire and
> rt_timer_tsc? I think rt_timer_inquire is giving the same results (and a
> little more, the period) like the other two ones, but in one call?
>
> As I understand, TSC is a reliable value on single processor machines with
> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ, CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR and CONFIG_APM disabled?! So I can
> use rt_timer_tsc?! Or should I better use rt_timer_read? (Please see above
> for my UseCase)
rt_timer_tsc has less overhead than rt_timer_read (it does not issue a
syscall, and it does not do any conversion).
On the other hand, rt_timer_read gives you an absolute value whose
reference is the well known 1st january 1970.
With rt_timer_inquire, you get rt_timer_tsc and rt_timer_read at the
same time, and you know the relation between the two values.
--
Gilles.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
RTnet-users mailing list
RTnet-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtnet-users
