From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: <9fans@9fans.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon,  1 Aug 2011 12:12:22 -0500
From: EBo <ebo@sandien.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP6exYK=p0SL0rVcscwCymqaJKd9fQyW=2RouEe6KDD=E=4NNQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9ede6397cd5d6431cfc44a2504cdae6f@swcp.com>
	<CAP6exYK=p0SL0rVcscwCymqaJKd9fQyW=2RouEe6KDD=E=4NNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <81c4d9d5aef94a678b81f7fc7a11cf80@swcp.com>
User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.4-trunk
Subject: Re: [9fans] =?utf-8?q?nsec_limits=3F?=
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 098e863e-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

 On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 08:57:13 -0700, ron minnich wrote:
> What kind of timing tests? What kind of accuracy are you looking for?
> What platform?

 It is for the HARE project (Plan 9 on the BG/P).  I am basically
 running direct comparisons against Brazil, which also used nsec.  I need
 to calc the time used in each of several steps in starting, stopping,
 and running tasks as well as the time it takes to distribute input data
 and accumulate the results.  From the published results I'm guessing
 that I need millisecond resolution, but not sure of the requirements.

 At this point I am following after Brazil's original implementation,
 however I also built a little tool to cache timestamps in memory and
 grab them from anywhere in the code.  If you have other suggestions I
 would love to hear them.

   EBo --