[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51A5CEF9.3050802@citrix.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 10:48:41 +0100
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
CC: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>, <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] x86/xen: sync the wallclock when the
system time changes
On 29/05/13 08:39, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 28.05.13 at 20:22, David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com> wrote:
>> +static int xen_pvclock_gtod_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long unused,
>> + void *priv)
>> +{
>> + static struct timespec last, next;
>> + struct timespec now;
>> + struct timekeeper *tk = priv;
>> + struct xen_platform_op op;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Set the Xen wallclock from Linux system time.
>> + *
>> + * dom0 hasn't historically maintained a very accurate
>> + * wallclock so guests don't expect it. We can therefore
>> + * reduce the number of expensive hypercalls by only updating
>> + * the wallclock every 0.5 s.
>> + */
>> +
>> + now.tv_sec = tk->xtime_sec;
>> + now.tv_nsec = tk->xtime_nsec >> tk->shift;
>> +
>> + if (timespec_compare(&now, &last) > 0
>> + && timespec_compare(&now, &next) < 0)
>
> Is this really working the first time through (when both last and
> next are still all zeros)?
Yes. The first time through we want to set the wallclock and this test
is always false when last == next.
David
--
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