[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] SVM: enables TSC scaling ratio support for SVM

Hi Dan,

I tested it by migrating between systems with TSC and without TSC, mainly using a Linux guest VM.

I might have missed your point. But what is offset1 in your formula? My understanding is that hvm_get_guest_tsc() returns a TSC value guests are supposed to use. So when guest_tsc is set, we can re-calculate offset=hvm_get_guest_tsc() - host_tsc * ratio. This is how current Xen is implemented. Also, as long as host_tsc doesn't go backwards (i.e. TSC_RELIABLE), host_tsc * ratio+offset should be reliable. Are you concerned that cpu_khz might be (slightly) different on different cores?

This feature is only available under SVM mode. HVM guests won't be able to see it in CPUID. PV guests shouldn't be able to change the value of this MSR.


On 05/27/2011 03:41 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
From: Wei Huang [mailto:wei.huang2@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 10:35 AM
To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Keir Fraser
Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] SVM: enables TSC scaling ratio support for

Future AMD CPUs support TSC scaling. It allows guests to have a
different TSC frequency from host system using this formula: guest_tsc
host_tsc * tsc_ratio + vmcb_offset. The tsc_ratio is a 64bit MSR
contains a fixed-point number in 8.32 format (8 bits for integer part
and 32bits for fractional part). For instance 0x00000003_80000000 means

This patch enables TSC scaling ratio for SVM. With it, guest VMs don't
need take #VMEXIT to calculate a translated TSC value when it is
under TSC emulation mode. This can SUBSTANTIALLY reduce the rdtsc

Signed-off-by: Wei Huang<wei.huang2@xxxxxxx>
Has this patch been tested across save/restore and migration,
especially between machines with and without the feature and
especially across many migrations where each physical
machine has a different tsc_ratio?

ISTR that this feature does not really do a generic adjustment
so may mis-scale time that has been accrued on one or more
previous physical machines.  In other words, I think the problem
is that it does

(host_tsc * tsc_ratio) + offset

and not

((host_tsc + offset1) * tsc_ratio) + offset2

This can be fixed if you trust cpu_khz to be precise on all
machines, but I don't think it is sufficiently precise to
guarantee that time never goes backwards in a guest (though
that may be fixable too).  If time DOES go backwards and
the guest detects it, it may switch to a much slower
timer mechanism which could be worse than trapping

All of this is from vague recollection... if it is all fully
tested across all cases (and sufficient testing proves that
time never goes backwards), consider this just noting a concern.

Also, is this feature visible from an HVM guest kernel?  Is
it visible from a PV guest cpuid (e.g. OS or app)?


Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.