[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201201150205.GA42117@fuller.cnet>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 12:02:05 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] RFC: Precise TSC migration
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 02:48:11PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30 2020 at 16:16, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >> Besides, Linux guests don't sync the TSC via IA32_TSC write,
> >> but rather use IA32_TSC_ADJUST which currently doesn't participate
> >> in the tsc sync heruistics.
> >
> > Linux should not try to sync the TSC with IA32_TSC_ADJUST. It expects
> > the BIOS to boot with synced TSCs.
>
> That's wishful thinking.
>
> Reality is that BIOS tinkerers fail to get it right. TSC_ADJUST allows
> us to undo the wreckage they create.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
Have not seen any multicore Dell/HP systems require that.
Anyway, for QEMU/KVM it should be synced (unless there is a bug
in the sync logic in the first place).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists