[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180911102504.GC11418@zn.tnic>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 12:25:04 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/5] x86/kvm: Avoid dynamic allocation of pvclock data
when SEV is active
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:19:13PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> That's exactly what kvmclock is for, it provides a stable and
> synchronized clock on top of unsynchronized TSCs. But that's also why
> you need one struct per vCPU, at least in the synchronized case.
Why?
Why can't it be a single pointer to a struct pvclock_vsyscall_time_info
shared between all vCPUs?
Or does each vCPU write its own specific stuff into it so it has to be
per-vCPU?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
Powered by blists - more mailing lists