Timer function to provide time in nano seconds using C++

Viewed 209148

I wish to calculate the time it took for an API to return a value. The time taken for such an action is in the space of nanoseconds. As the API is a C++ class/function, I am using the timer.h to calculate the same:

  #include <ctime>
  #include <iostream>

  using namespace std;

  int main(int argc, char** argv) {

      clock_t start;
      double diff;
      start = clock();
      diff = ( std::clock() - start ) / (double)CLOCKS_PER_SEC;
      cout<<"printf: "<< diff <<'\n';

      return 0;
  }

The above code gives the time in seconds. How do I get the same in nano seconds and with more precision?

17 Answers

What others have posted about running the function repeatedly in a loop is correct.

For Linux (and BSD) you want to use clock_gettime().

#include <sys/time.h>

int main()
{
   timespec ts;
   // clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &ts); // Works on FreeBSD
   clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &ts); // Works on Linux
}

For windows you want to use the QueryPerformanceCounter. And here is more on QPC

Apparently there is a known issue with QPC on some chipsets, so you may want to make sure you do not have those chipset. Additionally some dual core AMDs may also cause a problem. See the second post by sebbbi, where he states:

QueryPerformanceCounter() and QueryPerformanceFrequency() offer a bit better resolution, but have different issues. For example in Windows XP, all AMD Athlon X2 dual core CPUs return the PC of either of the cores "randomly" (the PC sometimes jumps a bit backwards), unless you specially install AMD dual core driver package to fix the issue. We haven't noticed any other dual+ core CPUs having similar issues (p4 dual, p4 ht, core2 dual, core2 quad, phenom quad).

EDIT 2013/07/16:

It looks like there is some controversy on the efficacy of QPC under certain circumstances as stated in http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ee417693(v=vs.85).aspx

...While QueryPerformanceCounter and QueryPerformanceFrequency typically adjust for multiple processors, bugs in the BIOS or drivers may result in these routines returning different values as the thread moves from one processor to another...

However this StackOverflow answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/4588605/34329 states that QPC should work fine on any MS OS after Win XP service pack 2.

This article shows that Windows 7 can determine if the processor(s) have an invariant TSC and falls back to an external timer if they don't. http://performancebydesign.blogspot.com/2012/03/high-resolution-clocks-and-timers-for.html Synchronizing across processors is still an issue.

Other fine reading related to timers:

See the comments for more details.

With that level of accuracy, it would be better to reason in CPU tick rather than in system call like clock(). And do not forget that if it takes more than one nanosecond to execute an instruction... having a nanosecond accuracy is pretty much impossible.

Still, something like that is a start:

Here's the actual code to retrieve number of 80x86 CPU clock ticks passed since the CPU was last started. It will work on Pentium and above (386/486 not supported). This code is actually MS Visual C++ specific, but can be probably very easy ported to whatever else, as long as it supports inline assembly.

inline __int64 GetCpuClocks()
{

    // Counter
    struct { int32 low, high; } counter;

    // Use RDTSC instruction to get clocks count
    __asm push EAX
    __asm push EDX
    __asm __emit 0fh __asm __emit 031h // RDTSC
    __asm mov counter.low, EAX
    __asm mov counter.high, EDX
    __asm pop EDX
    __asm pop EAX

    // Return result
    return *(__int64 *)(&counter);

}

This function has also the advantage of being extremely fast - it usually takes no more than 50 cpu cycles to execute.

Using the Timing Figures:
If you need to translate the clock counts into true elapsed time, divide the results by your chip's clock speed. Remember that the "rated" GHz is likely to be slightly different from the actual speed of your chip. To check your chip's true speed, you can use several very good utilities or the Win32 call, QueryPerformanceFrequency().

I am using the following to get the desired results:

#include <time.h>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

int main (int argc, char** argv)
{
    // reset the clock
    timespec tS;
    tS.tv_sec = 0;
    tS.tv_nsec = 0;
    clock_settime(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &tS);
    ...
    ... <code to check for the time to be put here>
    ...
    clock_gettime(CLOCK_PROCESS_CPUTIME_ID, &tS);
    cout << "Time taken is: " << tS.tv_sec << " " << tS.tv_nsec << endl;

    return 0;
}

In general, for timing how long it takes to call a function, you want to do it many more times than just once. If you call your function only once and it takes a very short time to run, you still have the overhead of actually calling the timer functions and you don't know how long that takes.

For example, if you estimate your function might take 800 ns to run, call it in a loop ten million times (which will then take about 8 seconds). Divide the total time by ten million to get the time per call.

You can use the following function with gcc running under x86 processors:

unsigned long long rdtsc()
{
  #define rdtsc(low, high) \
         __asm__ __volatile__("rdtsc" : "=a" (low), "=d" (high))

  unsigned int low, high;
  rdtsc(low, high);
  return ((ulonglong)high << 32) | low;
}

with Digital Mars C++:

unsigned long long rdtsc()
{
   _asm
   {
        rdtsc
   }
}

which reads the high performance timer on the chip. I use this when doing profiling.

If you need subsecond precision, you need to use system-specific extensions, and will have to check with the documentation for the operating system. POSIX supports up to microseconds with gettimeofday, but nothing more precise since computers didn't have frequencies above 1GHz.

If you are using Boost, you can check boost::posix_time.

I'm using Borland code here is the code ti_hund gives me some times a negativnumber but timing is fairly good.

#include <dos.h>

void main() 
{
struct  time t;
int Hour,Min,Sec,Hun;
gettime(&t);
Hour=t.ti_hour;
Min=t.ti_min;
Sec=t.ti_sec;
Hun=t.ti_hund;
printf("Start time is: %2d:%02d:%02d.%02d\n",
   t.ti_hour, t.ti_min, t.ti_sec, t.ti_hund);
....
your code to time
...

// read the time here remove Hours and min if the time is in sec

gettime(&t);
printf("\nTid Hour:%d Min:%d Sec:%d  Hundreds:%d\n",t.ti_hour-Hour,
                             t.ti_min-Min,t.ti_sec-Sec,t.ti_hund-Hun);
printf("\n\nAlt Ferdig Press a Key\n\n");
getch();
} // end main

If this is for Linux, I've been using the function "gettimeofday", which returns a struct that gives the seconds and microseconds since the Epoch. You can then use timersub to subtract the two to get the difference in time, and convert it to whatever precision of time you want. However, you specify nanoseconds, and it looks like the function clock_gettime() is what you're looking for. It puts the time in terms of seconds and nanoseconds into the structure you pass into it.

plf::nanotimer is a lightweight option for this, works in Windows, Linux, Mac and BSD etc. Has ~microsecond accuracy depending on OS:

  #include "plf_nanotimer.h"
  #include <iostream>

  int main(int argc, char** argv)
  {
      plf::nanotimer timer;

      timer.start()

      // Do something here

      double results = timer.get_elapsed_ns();
      std::cout << "Timing: " << results << " nanoseconds." << std::endl;    
      return 0;
  }
Related