[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5183976A.6000703@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 03 May 2013 11:54:34 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
CC: Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"john.stultz@...aro.org" <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/3] arm_arch_timer: introduce arch_timer_stolen_ticks
On 03/05/13 11:43, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2013, Christopher Covington wrote:
>>> So the virtual timer should appear to have been running even while time
>>> is being stolen and therefore stolen time needs to be accounted via some
>>> other means.
>>
>> Something that's not currently obvious to me is that given that the stolen
>> cycle accounting should be done, what makes the architected timer interrupt
>> handler the ideal place to do it?
>
> That is a good question and I would appreciate suggestions to improve
> the patch.
>
> Given that Xen x86 and ia64 does stolen time accounting from the timer
> interrupt handler:
>
> arch/x86/xen/time.c:xen_timer_interrupt
> arch/ia64/kernel/time.c:timer_interrupt
>
> and given that the arch_timer is the only timer used by Xen on ARM and
> that it includes a virt_timer that is made on purpose to be used by
> virtual machines, I thought that it might be a good place for it.
>
> I also thought that doing it this way, KVM should be able to reuse the
> same hook.
Indeed. I just need to understand how time stealing works there ;-).
Now, KVM is not necessarily limited to arch_timers, and we've run KVM
using a QEMU-provided timer in the past. Can you think of a more generic
location for this hook? Possibly something that would satisfy the
requirements of other architectures while we're at it?
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
--
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