|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy
> >> At guest install time you ought to be able to tell whether
> the guest
> >> will use hpet or not based on its version (RHELx, SLESy,
> Winz etc etc)
> >> and decide whether missed-ticks accounting is required or not.
> >
> > Unfortunately this is not true on Linux, at least without gathering
> > (and hardcoding) more information about the system. Whether hpet is
> > used or not is dependent not only on the OS/version and hvm config
> > parameters, but also on kernel command line parameters and even
> > the underlying CPU. For example, on RHEL5u1, if the tsc is
> synchronized
> > and the CPU is Intel, and no kernel parameters are chosen,
> tsc will be
> > chosen as the default clocksource even if hpet is present. Ugly.
>
> It's not immediately obvious that adding further independent
> configuration
> knobs to twiddle would make our lives that much easier.
> However it certainly
> increases the test matrix.
I fully agree. That's why I think the default parameters in Xen
should "do the right thing". The default will get the most
testing and if users say "time hurts when I change the parameters"
we can say "then don't change the parameters" ;-)
> In your example above, by synchronised TSC do you mean
> constant-rate TSC?
> That can at least be hidden in CPUID now.
I meant synchronized as defined in 2.6.18/arch/x86_64/kernel/time.c
in the function unsynchronized_tsc() and as used in the same file
in time_init_gtod(). To make this more complicated, these routines
have had not-insignificant bug fixes in RHEL5u1/2.
But yes, it might be a good idea if X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC
always returns 0 (or at least is configurable and defaults off),
since the test may only be made in the guest at boot time and
the guest may migrate to a machine without the feature.
More ugliness, I know. My head hurts.
Dan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, (continued)
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dan Magenheimer
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy,
Dan Magenheimer <=
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dan Magenheimer
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dan Magenheimer
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dave Winchell
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dan Magenheimer
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dan Magenheimer
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dave Winchell
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dan Magenheimer
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dan Magenheimer
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Improve hpet accuracy, Dave Winchell
|
|
|
|
|