[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4f079cd6-0872-4cb5-832b-ee6a46841192@default>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: 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@...cle.com,
chris.mason@...cle.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/pvclock: add vsyscall
implementation
Is there any way for an application to conclusively determine
programmatically if the "fast vsyscall" pvclock is functional
vs the much much slower gettimeofday/clock_gettime equivalents?
If not, might it be possible to implement some (sysfs?)
way to determine this, that would also be backwards compatible
to existing OS's that don't have pvclock+vsyscall supported?
Thanks,
Dan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Avi Kivity [mailto:avi@...hat.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 6:33 AM
> To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge
> Cc: Dan Magenheimer; Jeremy Fitzhardinge; Kurt Hackel; the arch/x86
> maintainers; Linux Kernel Mailing List; Glauber de Oliveira Costa;
> Xen-devel; Keir Fraser; Zach Brown; Chris Mason; Ingo Molnar
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/pvclock: add vsyscall
> implementation
>
>
> On 10/14/2009 05:00 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >
> >> 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.
> >
>
> It does - that's how kvm implements pvclock on the host side. See
> kvmclock_cpufreq_notifier() in arch/x86/kvm/x86.c.
>
> --
> I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
> signature is too narrow to contain.
>
>
>
--
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