Jason Ekstrand <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > You've got me almost convinced as well. Thanks for the diagrams! I think > instead of adding 1 perhaps what we want is > > max2(sample_interval_ns, gpu_tick_ns + monotonic_tick_ns) > > Where monotonic_tick_ns is maybe as low as 1. Am I following you correctly? Not quite; I was thinking that because the sample_interval_ns is measured by sampling the monotonic clock twice, the actual interval can be up to 1 tick longer, so max2(sample_interval_ns + monotonic_tick_ns, gpu_tick_ns) The gpu_tick_ns is computed, not measured, and so accurately reflects the maximum deviation in the measurements. -- -keith
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
