On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 08:52:54AM +0100, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> thanks for your reply.
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 07:32:37PM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > there is a bug in the emulation of the lapic time counter. In particular
> > > what we are seeing is that the time counter of a periodic lapic timer
> > > in the guest reads as zero 99% of the time. The patch below fixes that.
> > >
> > > The emulation of the lapic timer is done with the help of a hires
> > > timer that expires with the same frequency as the lapic counter.
> > > New expiration times for a periodic timer are calculated incrementally
> > > based on the last scheduled expiration time. This ensures long term
> > > accuracy of the emulated timer close to that of the underlying clock.
> > >
> > > The actual value of the lapic time counter is calculated from the
> > > real time difference between current time and scheduled expiration time
> > > of the hires timer. If this difference is negative, the hires timer
> > > expired. For oneshot mode this is correctly translated into a zero value
> > > for the time counter. However, in periodic mode we must use the negative
> > > difference unmodified.
> > >
> > > regards Christian
> > >
> > > Fix lapic time counter read for periodic mode.
> >
> > In periodic mode the hrtimer is rearmed once expired, see
> > apic_timer_fn. So _get_remaining should return proper value
> > even if the guest is not able to process timer interrupts.
> >
> > Can you describe your specific scenario in more detail?
>
> In my specific case, the host is admittedly somewhat special as it
> already is a rehosted version of linux, i.e. not running directly on
> native hardware. It is still unclear if the host has sufficiently accurate
> timer interrupts. This is most likely part of the problems we are seeing.
>
> However, AFAICS apic_timer_fn is only called once per jiffy (at least in
> some configurations). In particular, it is not called by
> hrtimer_get_remaining. Thus depending on the frequency of the LAPIC timer
> in the guest there might _several_ iterations that are missed. This can
> probably be mitigated by a hires timer interrupts. However, I think
> the problem is still there even in that case.
>
> Additionally, the behaviour that I want to establish matches that of the
> PIT timer (in a not completely obvious way, though).
>
> Having said that the proposed patch in my first mail is incomplete, as
> the mod_64 does not work correctly for negative values. A fixed version
> is below.
>
> regards Christian
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Ehrhardt <lk@xxxxxxx>
Alright. Please add a comment from the LAPIC documentation describing
this behaviour (and a nice changelog). Thanks.
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> index 43e9fad..ec7242c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> @@ -810,11 +810,22 @@ static u32 apic_get_tmcct(struct kvm_lapic *apic)
> if (kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_TMICT) == 0)
> return 0;
>
> + /*
> + * hrtimer_get_remaining returns the signed difference between
> + * timer expiration time and current time. Keep negative return
> + * values iff the the timer is periodic.
> + */
> remaining = hrtimer_get_remaining(&apic->lapic_timer.timer);
> - if (ktime_to_ns(remaining) < 0)
> - remaining = ktime_set(0, 0);
> + ns = ktime_to_ns(remaining);
> + if (unlikely(ns < 0)) {
> + if (apic_lvtt_period(apic))
> + ns = apic->lapic_timer.period -
> + mod_64(-ns, apic->lapic_timer.period);
> + else
> + ns = 0;
> + }
>
> - ns = mod_64(ktime_to_ns(remaining), apic->lapic_timer.period);
> + ns = mod_64(ns, apic->lapic_timer.period);
> tmcct = div64_u64(ns,
> (APIC_BUS_CYCLE_NS * apic->divide_count));
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
