On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 11:17:33AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 30/09/21 21:14, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > + new_off_n = t_0 + off_n + (k_1 - k_0) * freq - t_1 > > Hi Oliver, > > > > This won't advance the TSC values themselves, right? > > Why not? It affects the TSC offset in the vmcs, so the TSC in the VM is > advanced too. > > Paolo +4. Invoke the KVM_SET_CLOCK ioctl, providing the kvmclock nanoseconds + (k_0) and realtime nanoseconds (r_0) in their respective fields. + Ensure that the KVM_CLOCK_REALTIME flag is set in the provided + structure. KVM will advance the VM's kvmclock to account for elapsed + time since recording the clock values. You can't advance both kvmclock (kvmclock_offset variable) and the TSCs, which would be double counting. So you have to either add the elapsed realtime (1) between KVM_GET_CLOCK to kvmclock (which this patch is doing), or to the TSCs. If you do both, there is double counting. Am i missing something? To make it clearer: TSC clocksource is faster than kvmclock source, so we'd rather use when possible, which is achievable with TSC scaling support on HW. 1: As mentioned earlier, just using the realtime clock delta between hosts can introduce problems. So need a scheme to: - Find the offset between host clocks, with upper and lower bounds on error. - Take appropriate actions based on that (for example, do not use KVM_CLOCK_REALTIME flag on KVM_SET_CLOCK if the delta between hosts is large). Which can be done in userspace or kernel space... (hum, but maybe delegating this to userspace will introduce different solutions of the same problem?). > > This (advancing the TSC values by the realtime elapsed time) would be > > awesome because TSC clock_gettime() vdso is faster, and some > > applications prefer to just read from TSC directly. > > See "x86: kvmguest: use TSC clocksource if invariant TSC is exposed". > > > > The advancement with this patchset only applies to kvmclock. > > > >
