[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C18DBEE.70600@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:13:02 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com>
CC: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Zachary Amsden <zamsden@...hat.com>, mtosatti@...hat.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/17] Fix a possible backwards warp of kvmclock
On 06/16/2010 04:58 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 04:11:26PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>> Zachary Amsden wrote:
>>
>>> Kernel time, which advances in discrete steps may progress much slower
>>> than TSC. As a result, when kvmclock is adjusted to a new base, the
>>> apparent time to the guest, which runs at a much higher, nsec scaled
>>> rate based on the current TSC, may have already been observed to have
>>> a larger value (kernel_ns + scaled tsc) than the value to which we are
>>> setting it (kernel_ns + 0).
>>>
>>>
>> This is one issue of kvmclock which tries to supply a clocksource whose
>> precision may even higher than host.
>>
> What if we export to the guest the current clock resolution, and when doing guest
> reads, simply chop whatever value we got to the lowest acceptable value?
>
The clock resolution can change, and while we can expose it reliably
through pvclock, do we need a notification so that the guest can update
other internal structures?
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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