1ms resolution timer under linux recommended way

Question

Hi,

I need a timer tick with 1ms resolution under linux. It is used to increment a timer value that in turn is used to see if various Events should be triggered. The POSIX timerfd_create is not an option because of the glibc requirement. I tried timer_create and timer_settimer, but the best I get from them is a 10ms resolution, smaller values seem to default to 10ms resolution. Getittimer and setitimer have a 10 ms resolution according to the manpage.

The only way to do this timer I can currently think of is to use clock_gettime with CLOCK_MONOTONIC in my main loop an test if a ms has passed, and if so to increase the counter (and then check if the various Events should fire).

Is there a better way to do this than to constantly query in the main loop? What is the recommended solution to this?

The language I am using is plain old c

Update
I am using a 2.6.26 Kernel. I know you can have it interrupt at 1kHz, and the POSIX timer_* functions then can be programmed to up to 1ms but that seems not to be reliable and I don't want to use that, because it may need a new kernel on some Systems. Some stock Kernel seem to still have the 100Hz configured. And I would need to detect that. The application may be run on something else than my System :)

I can not sleep for 1ms because there may be network events I have to react to.

How I resolved it Since it is not that important I simply declared that the global timer has a 100ms resolution. All events using their own timer have to set at least 100ms for timer expiration. I was more or less wondering if there would be a better way, hence the question.

Why I accepted the answer I think the answer from freespace best described why it is not really possible without a realtime Linux System.

Answer 1

Can you at least use nanosleep in your loop to sleep for 1ms? Or is that a glibc thing?

Update: Never mind, I see from the man page "it can take up to 10 ms longer than specified until the process becomes runnable again"

Answer 2

I think you'll have trouble achieving 1 ms precision with standard Linux even with constant querying in the main loop, because the kernel does not ensure your application will get CPU all the time. For example, you can be put to sleep for dozens of milliseconds because of preemptive multitasking and there's little you can do about it.

You might want to look into Real-Time Linux.

Answer 3

Are you running on a Linux 2.4 kernel?

From VMware KB article #1420 (http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1420).

Linux guest operating systems keep time by counting timer interrupts. Unpatched 2.4 and earlier kernels program the virtual system timer to request clock interrupts at 100Hz (100 interrupts per second). 2.6 kernels, on the other hand, request interrupts at 1000Hz - ten times as often. Some 2.4 kernels modified by distribution vendors to contain 2.6 features also request 1000Hz interrupts, or in some cases, interrupts at other rates, such as 512Hz.

Answer 4

Polling in the main loop isn't an answer either - your process might not get much CPU time, so more than 10ms will elapse before your code gets to run, rendering it moot.

10ms is about the standard timer resolution for most non-realtime operating systems (RTOS). But it is moot in a non-RTOS - the behaviour of the scheduler and dispatcher is going to greatly influence how quickly you can respond to a timer expiring. For example even suppose you had a sub 10ms resolution timer, you can't respond to the timer expiring if your code is running. Since you can't predict when your code is going to run, you can't respond to timer expiration accurately.

There is of course realtime linux kernels, see http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT8073314981.html for a list. A RTOS offers facilities whereby you can get soft or hard guarantees about when your code is going to run. This is about the only way to reliably and accurately respond to timers expiring etc.

Answer 5

I'm not sure it's the best solution, but you might consider writing a small kernel module that uses the kernel high-res timers to do timing. Basically, you'd create a device file for which reads would only return on 1ms intervals.

An example of this type of approach is used in the Asterisk PBX, via the ztdummy module. If you google for ztdummy you can find the code that does this.

Answer 6

There is ktimer patch for linux kernel:

http://lwn.net/Articles/167897/

http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/

HTH

Answer 7

I seem to recall getting ok results with gettimeofday/usleep based polling -- I wasn't needing 1000 timers a second or anything, but I was needing good accuracy with the timing for ticks I did need -- my app was a MIDI drum machine controller, and I seem to remember getting sub-millisecond accuracy, which you need for a drum machine if you don't want it to sound like a very bad drummer (esp. counting MIDI's built-in latencies) -- iirc (it was 2005 so my memory is a bit fuzzy) I was getting within 200 microseconds of target times with usleep.

However, I was not running much else on the system. If you have a controlled environment you might be able to get away with a solution like that. If there's more going on the system (watch cron firing up updatedb, etc.) then things may fall apart.