linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] timekeeping: add EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL for do

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 21 Oct 2014 09:02:26 +0000
From:	Thomas Shao <huishao@...rosoft.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
	"olaf@...fle.de" <olaf@...fle.de>,
	"apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>,
	"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
	KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Richard Cochran <rcochran@...utronix.de>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] timekeeping: add EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL for
 do_adjtimex()


> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:linux-kernel-
> owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Gleixner
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 4:19 PM
> To: Thomas Shao
> Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; LKML; devel@...uxdriverproject.org;
> olaf@...fle.de; apw@...onical.com; jasowang@...hat.com; KY Srinivasan;
> John Stultz; Richard Cochran
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] timekeeping: add EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL for
> do_adjtimex()
> 
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2014, Thomas Shao wrote:
> > > I still do not have a consistent argument from you WHY you need to
> > > abuse
> > > do_adjtimex() to do that host - guest synchronization in the first place.
> > >
> >
> > I need a function to gradually slew guest time. do_adjtimex() provides
> > all the functionality. Also I could not find any other exposed func to
> > do this. I'd like to hear any feedback from you for this.
> 
> As Richard and others told you already, there are various options:
> 
> 1) Use NTP on that private network, which does not involve any kernel
>    changes at all.
> 
>    Your argument, that this is hard for IT-Admins to set up is just
>    ridiculous. If an IT-Admin is not able to set that up, then he
>    should better stay away from setting up a guest in the first place,
>    really.
> 
> 2) As pointed out already by others PPS/PTP might be a proper solution
>    for this.
> 
>    All it takes is a pair of timestamps (host/guest) injected into the
>    proper subsystem and a controlling daemon on the guest side. That
>    would also avoid the problem of running NTPd and your kernel side
>    poor mans NTPd at the same time.
> 
>    That pseudo NTP thing is just hilarious, really.
> 
>    You take the host time stamp in timesync_onchannelcallback() and
>    schedule work. From the work queue you correlate the host time
>    stamp to the current time of the guest. So you correlate time
>    stamps which can be an arbitrary time apart. Brilliant solution
>    that, really.
> 

OK. I'll investigate these options. Thanks.

> Thanks,
> 
> 	tglx
> 
> --
> 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/
--
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/