Re: [PATCH] allow userspace to adjust kvmclock offset

[Glauber Costa]

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 09:46:52AM +0900, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/13/2009 09:46 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 03:31:08PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>    
>>> On 10/13/2009 03:28 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
>>>      
>>>>        
>>>>> Do we want an absolute or relative adjustment?
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>> What exactly do you mean?
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> Absolute adjustment: clock = t
>>> Relative adjustment: clock += t
>>>      
>> The delta is absolute, but the adjustment in the clock is relative.
>>
>> So we pick the difference between what userspace is passing us and what
>> we currently have, then relatively adds up so we can make sure we won't
>> go back or suffer a too big skew.
>>    
>
> The motivation for relative adjustment is when you have a jitter  
> resistant place to gather timing information (like the kernel, which can  
> disable interrupts and preemption), then pass it on to kvm without  
> losing information due to scheduling.  For migration there is no such  
> place since it involves two hosts, but it makes sense to support  
> relative adjustments.
Since we added the padding you asked for, we could use that bit of information
to define whether it will be a relative or absolute adjustment, then. Right now,
I don't see the point of implementing a code path that will be completely untested.

I'd leave it this way until someone comes up with a need.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/