Hi Marc,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, September 5, 2020 7:33 PM
> To: Jianyong Wu <Jianyong.Wu@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; yangbo.lu@xxxxxxx; john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx;
> tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx; sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx;
> richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx; Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@xxxxxxx>;
> will@xxxxxxxxxx; Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@xxxxxxx>; Steven Price
> <Steven.Price@xxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Steve Capper <Steve.Capper@xxxxxxx>; Justin He
> <Justin.He@xxxxxxx>; nd <nd@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 08/10] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64
>
> On Fri, 04 Sep 2020 10:27:42 +0100,
> Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Currently, there is no mechanism to keep time sync between guest and
> > host in arm64 virtualization environment. Time in guest will drift
> > compared with host after boot up as they may both use third party time
> > sources to correct their time respectively. The time deviation will be
> > in order of milliseconds. But in some scenarios,like in cloud
> > envirenment, we ask for higher time precision.
> >
> > kvm ptp clock, which choose the host clock source as a reference clock
> > to sync time between guest and host, has been adopted by x86 which
> > makes the time sync order from milliseconds to nanoseconds.
> >
> > This patch enables kvm ptp clock for arm64 and improve clock sync
> > precison significantly.
> >
> > Test result comparisons between with kvm ptp clock and without it in
> > arm64 are as follows. This test derived from the result of command
> > 'chronyc sources'. we should take more care of the last sample column
> > which shows the offset between the local clock and the source at the last
> measurement.
> >
> > no kvm ptp in guest:
> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample
> >
> ==========================================================
> ==============
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 13 +1040us[+1581us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 21 +1040us[+1581us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 29 +1040us[+1581us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 37 +1040us[+1581us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 45 +1040us[+1581us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 53 +1040us[+1581us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 61 +1040us[+1581us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 4 -130us[ +796us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 12 -130us[ +796us] +/- 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 20 -130us[ +796us] +/- 21ms
> >
> > in host:
> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample
> >
> ==========================================================
> ==============
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 72 -470us[ -603us] +/- 18ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 92 -470us[ -603us] +/- 18ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 112 -470us[ -603us] +/- 18ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 2 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 22 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 43 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 63 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 83 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 103 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 123 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- 17ms
> >
> > The dns1.synet.edu.cn is the network reference clock for guest and
> > 120.25.115.20 is the network reference clock for host. we can't get
> > the clock error between guest and host directly, but a roughly
> > estimated value will be in order of hundreds of us to ms.
> >
> > with kvm ptp in guest:
> > chrony has been disabled in host to remove the disturb by network clock.
> >
> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample
> >
> ==========================================================
> ==============
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 -7ns[ +1ns] +/- 3ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 +1ns[ +16ns] +/- 3ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 6 -4ns[ -0ns] +/- 6ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 6 -8ns[ -12ns] +/- 5ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 5 +2ns[ +4ns] +/- 4ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 13 +2ns[ +4ns] +/- 4ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 12 -4ns[ -6ns] +/- 4ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 11 -8ns[ -11ns] +/- 6ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 10 -14ns[ -20ns] +/- 4ns
> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 +4ns[ +5ns] +/- 4ns
> >
> > The PHC0 is the ptp clock which choose the host clock as its source
> > clock. So we can see that the clock difference between host and guest
> > is in order of ns.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 24 +++++++++++++
> > drivers/ptp/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c | 53
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644
> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c
>
> And I missed that one earlier:
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > index d55acffb0b90..aaf286e90092 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > @@ -1650,3 +1650,27 @@ static int __init arch_timer_acpi_init(struct
> > acpi_table_header *table) } TIMER_ACPI_DECLARE(arch_timer,
> > ACPI_SIG_GTDT, arch_timer_acpi_init); #endif
> > +
> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM)
> > +#include <linux/arm-smccc.h>
>
> No conditional includes, please.
>
Ok.
> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp(unsigned long *cycle, struct
> timespec64 *ts,
> > + struct clocksource **cs)
> > +{
> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res;
> > + ktime_t ktime;
> > +
> > + /* Currently, linux guest will always use the virtual counter */
> > +
> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU
> NC_ID,
> > + ARM_PTP_VIRT_COUNTER, &hvc_res);
>
> You don't need to assume anything. This driver already provides you with the
> information you need to tell the hypervisor which counter to
> use:
>
> if (arch_timer_uses_ppi == ARCH_TIMER_VIRT_PPI)
> ptp_counter = ARM_PTP_VIRT_COUNTER;
> else
> ptp_counter = ARM_PTP_PHYS_COUNTER;
> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU
> NC_ID,
> ptp_counter, &hvc_res);
>
> At least, this is vaguely future proof.
>
> The hypervisor will still have to discriminate between a call between a call
> from vEL1 or vEL2 to decide whether to subtract the offset from the counter
> value, but that's out of scope for now.
Very kind of you!
Thanks
Jianyong
>
> M.
>
> --
> Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
