On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 11:02:41 -0700 jd1008 <jd1008(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 02/26/2016 10:44 AM, Tom Horsley wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 09:51:24 -0600
> Ranjan Maitra wrote:
>
>> How does this happen? The number of operations are exactly the same (or should
be).
> The number of operations in your program are the same, but
> your program is running on the same machine as the linux
> OS which has deamons running in the background, and may
> even be stopping to page in code your program needs, or grow
> pages as it allocates memory. Vast numbers of things
> affect timing. Even the stupid dynamic library load address
> randomization linux does can result in totally different
> cache hits in memory. The list goes on and on...
>
> Apart from linux, most motherboards these days have SMI
> interrupts happening behind everyone's back which leave
> missing chunks of time no one can account for.
Timings based on realtime clocks are not same as the per task
timers which are incremented only when the task is actually executing.
Hi,
I am not interested in realtime. I am interested in time spent by the processor in
executing a set of operations (which can include memory allocation and deallocation) which
have to do (only) with the operations being executed. Is this at all possible?
Many thanks,
Ranjan
____________________________________________________________
FREE ONLINE PHOTOSHARING - Share your photos online with your friends and family!
Visit
http://www.inbox.com/photosharing to find out more!