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] time still going backwards

To: Tim Freeman <tfreeman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] time still going backwards
From: Brian Wolfe <brianw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:13:54 -0500
Cc: Xen Devel Mailing List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 04:16:15 +0100
Envelope-to: steven.hand@xxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20041013150005.146f643d@prana-bindu>
List-archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=xen-devel>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-id: List for Xen developers <xen-devel.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: TerraBox.com Inc.
References: <E1CHYir-0006dD-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1CHdVx-000239-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20041013150005.146f643d@prana-bindu>
Reply-to: brianw@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xen-devel-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 2004-10-13 at 15:00, Tim Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:25:36 +0100
> Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > If you're getting APIC errors then all other bets are off, quite
> > frankly. Do you get any of these messages on a native Linux 2.4
> > kernel?
> 
> I've been running the benchmark just now on native Linux, no errors,
> APIC or otherwise.  I also had originally run the benchmark on native
> linux with the 'nosmp' flag (to compare more readily to Xen0) and also
> no errors there.
> 
> I re-ran the benchmark last night with the 8 xenU/4 physical
> configuration and repeated the problem on both the XenU's on the same
> physical node (it is the one the jobs are started from).  *Although*
> xen0 did not exhibit the time jump.  To answer Ian's question, I am
> running ntpd on each of the xen0's, perhaps that was the problem with
> domain 0 jumping (but I thought ntpd only makes minuscule steps, but
> ntpdate is the one that makes bigger jumps)

ntp can make large corrections, however the standard setup (default) is
to make ~120ms changes per "tick" on checking. Once ntpd is synced up it
shouldn't need to make more than ~2ms of change per tick unless your
hardware clock is totally farked (I'd call 1ms in 60 seconds beyond
farked to be honest). :)

> 
> Then I recompiled with Ian's suggested debug patch.  It went smoothly
> actually, no time errors, but still APIC errors in xm dmesg (definitely
> new, since I had rebooted).
> 
> ???
> 
> I am not really a super systems person (is that obvious yet? :-), but
> don't APIC errors have to do with SMP a lot of the time?  And what does
> APIC have to do with XenU timing issues? (does one of the new, extra
> IRQs go to XenU directly?)  Can I boot xen with the noapic flag?

Originally from what I understand, APIC was inplemented to allow SMP,
and as such was only used for SMP. Some time around the middle of the
2.4 series I noticed that you could select UP-APIC when SMP was
disabled. Not certain exactly when that ability was enabled though.

>  
> 
> Thanks for any input, I am going to continue running different
> configurations (as I originally planned) and I'll see if anything else
> happens.
> 
> > 
> >  -- Keir
> > 
> > > > xm dmesg:
> > > > 
> > > > (XEN) APIC error on CPU0: 00(02)
> > > > (XEN) APIC error on CPU1: 00(02)
> > > 
> > > Odd. Probably not terminal, though.
> > > 
> > > > Xen0 dmesg, just two error messages:
> > > > Timer ISR: Time went backwards: -59799000
> > > > Timer ISR: Time went backwards: -48699000
> > > 
> > > Interesting. So both both the xenU domains are reporting a 14s
> > > skip, and dom0 is reporting a larger skip (though this may be a
> > > different incident).
> > 
> > 
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
> > Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
> > Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
> > http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
> > 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
> Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
> Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
> http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel