WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] x86: unconditionally mark TSC unstable under

To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] x86: unconditionally mark TSC unstable under Xen
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 16:57:47 +0100
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jed Smith <jed@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 08:58:22 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4C3E2DCC.1010201@xxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <51C8308F-F413-47AF-8845-C92BD36CA35C@xxxxxxxxxx> <4C3E2DCC.1010201@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
On Wed, 14 Jul 2010, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 07/14/2010 12:24 PM, Jed Smith wrote:
> > Jeremy, Jan - what do you think?  Is this a bad move?  I feel like there
> > is a consequence to this that I am unaware of, but it fixes my issue.
> >   
> 
> Ah, well that's interesting.
> 
> There's a couple of comments:
> 
>    1. you can't do this with just a compile-time test, since the same
>       kernel can also boot native
>    2. nothing in a Xen PV domU environment should be using the tsc
>       directly, so this shouldn't have an effect.  If something is using
>       the tsc we should track it down.
> 
> I wonder, however, if you're getting the same result as Jan's suggestion
> of making sched_clock unstable by making the tsc unstable.
> 
> In that case, this patch may help:
> 
> Subject: [PATCH] xen: disable xen_sched_clock by default
> 
> xen_sched_clock only counts unstolen time.  In principle this should
> be useful to the Linux scheduler so that it knows how much time a process
> actually consumed.  But in practice this doesn't work very well as the
> scheduler expects the sched_clock time to be synchronized between
> cpus.  It also uses sched_clock to measure the time a task spends
> sleeping, in which case "unstolen time" isn't meaningful.
> 
> So just use plain xen_clocksource_read to return wallclock nanoseconds
> for sched_clock.
> 

I think that in this context is worth mentioning that
xen_clocksource_read ends up calling pvclock_get_nsec_offset that calls
native_read_tsc.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel