[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AD4DC52.8090508@goop.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:00:18 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
CC: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
kurt.hackel@...cle.com, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@...citrix.com>,
Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/pvclock: add vsyscall implementation
On 10/12/09 23:39, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/12/2009 09:13 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> On 10/12/09 11:29, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>
>>> Good catch. Doesn't that invalidate rdtscp based vgettimeofday on
>>> non-virt as well (assuming p == cpu)?
>>>
>> The tsc clocksource assumes the tsc is (mostly?) synced; it doesn't use
>> rdtscp or make any attempt at per-cpu corrections.
>>
>
> So it's broken or disabled when that assumption is wrong? We could
> easily fix that now. Might even reuse the pvclock structures.
Well, the kernel internally makes more or less the same assumption; the
vsyscall clocksource is the same as the kernel's internal one. I think
idea is that it just drops back to something like hpet if the tsc
doesn't have very simple SMP characteristics.
If the kernel could characterize the per-cpu properties of the tsc more
accurately, then it could use the pvclock mechanism on native.
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists