[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45bd5778-6217-427e-8ac2-f7b997470476@xen.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2023 11:06:25 +0000
From: Paul Durrant <xadimgnik@...il.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM x86/xen: add an override for
PVCLOCK_TSC_STABLE_BIT
On 31/10/2023 23:06, David Woodhouse wrote:
[snip]
>> mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
>> if (!kvm->created_vcpus) {
>> kvm->arch.force_tsc_unstable = true;
>> r = 0;
>> }
>> mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
>>
>> So that it would be blatantly obvious that there's no race with checking a per-VM
>> flag without any lock/RCU protections.
>
> Makes sense. Although TBH if the VMM wants to flip this bit on and off
> at runtime while the guest clocks are being updated, it deserves what
> it gets. It's not a problem for KVM.
>
The first version of the patch that used an attribute requested a clock
update when the attribute was set. I dropped that in this version but I
think it'd best to re-instate it.
Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists