On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:19:49PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 09:12:31PM +0000, Andrew Doran wrote: > > Module Name: src > > Committed By: ad > > Date: Thu May 21 21:12:31 UTC 2020 > > > > Modified Files: > > src/sys/arch/x86/acpi: acpi_wakeup.c > > src/sys/arch/x86/include: i82489var.h > > src/sys/arch/x86/x86: cpu.c lapic.c x86_machdep.c > > src/sys/arch/xen/x86: cpu.c > > src/sys/arch/xen/xen: hypervisor.c xen_clock.c > > > > Log Message: > > - Recalibrate the APIC timer using the TSC, once the TSC has in turn been > > recalibrated using the HPET. This gets the clock interrupt firing more > > closely to HZ. > > Why using the TSC and not the HPET directly? For systems with HPET, same > question with the ACPI / PCI timer.
The idea I'm going with is: The TSC is precise and very quick to read, far more so than the other timers where it's at least 0.5-1us to pull a value from the counter register. To get around slowness of the other timers the TSC is calibrated with respect to the HPET over a long span (seconds). I have no objection to revisiting it if we can do better, but this is at least much better than where we were before. kern.timecounter.choice = TSC(q=3000, f=1000000000 Hz) lapic(q=-100, f=200000000 Hz) clockinterrupt(q=0, f=100 Hz) hpet0(q=2000, f=14318180 Hz) ACPI-Fast(q=1000, f=3579545 Hz) i8254(q=100, f=1193182 Hz) dummy(q=-1000000, f=1000000 Hz) kern.timecounter.choice = TSC(q=3000, f=2500000000 Hz) lapic(q=-100, f=100000000 Hz) clockinterrupt(q=0, f=100 Hz) ichlpcib0(q=1000, f=3579545 Hz) hpet0(q=2000, f=14318180 Hz) ACPI-Fast(q=1000, f=3579545 Hz) i8254(q=100, f=1193182 Hz) dummy(q=-1000000, f=1000000 Hz) Andrew
