[Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?
tismer at stackless.com
Wed Mar 14 06:24:20 CET 2012
The performancecounter is a thing that typically gets intercepted by
the VM infrastructure and does no longer work as a reliable timing
source. In PyPy there are tests which check certain assumptions
how much the performancecounter must advance at least between
a few opcodes, and that does not work in a VM.
cheers - Chris
On 3/13/12 6:11 PM, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
> Interesting thought.
> Althougn I don't see how that could fail on windows, if the QPC function is really just talking to a clock chip, surely that hasn't been virtualized.
> Is there an actual example of windows hardware where this api fails (virtual or not?) Perhaps there is no real need to have a fallback mechanism, and it would even be best to write such a mechanism inside the function itself, and just return getsystemtimeasfiletime() instead.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Tismer [mailto:tismer at stackless.com]
> Sent: 13. mars 2012 18:07
> To: Kristján Valur Jónsson
> Cc: Guido van Rossum; Victor Stinner; Python Dev
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?
> Btw., have you considered virtual machines?
> I happen to run windows in Parallels or Virtualbox quite often.
> There the "wall clock" stuff notoriously does not work.
> It would be good (but difficult?) if the supposed-to-be-accurate clock could test itself, if it works at all, and replace itself with a fallback.
> In my case, this causes quite a few PyPy tests to fail ;-)
> ciao -- Chris
Christian Tismer :^)<mailto:tismer at stackless.com>
tismerysoft GmbH : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's
Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 121 : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/
14482 Potsdam : PGP key -> http://pgp.uni-mainz.de
work +49 173 24 18 776 mobile +49 173 24 18 776 fax n.a.
PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04
whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/
More information about the Python-Dev