Re: [PATCH] raise tsc clocksource rating

[Ingo Molnar]

* Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 00:02 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > Not every guest support paravirt, but for correctness, all guests 
> > > require TSC, which must be exposed all the way up to userspace, no 
> > > matter what the efficiency or accuracy may be.
> > 
> > but if there's a perfect TSC available (there is such hardware) then the 
> > TSC _is_ the best clocksource. Paravirt now turns it off unconditionally 
> > in essence.
> 
> No, if no paravirt clocksource is detected, nothing can override the
> perfect TSC hardware clocksource rating of 400.  And if a paravirt
> clocksource is detected, it is always better than TSC.
> 
> > anyway, that's at most an optimization issue. No strong feelings here, 
> > and we can certainly delay this patch until this gets all sorted out.
> 
> This patch should be nacked, since it is just wrong.  This is not an 
> optimization issue.  It is an accuracy issue for all virtualization 
> environments that affects long term kernel clock stability, which is 
> important to fix, and the best way to do that is to use a paravirt 
> clocksource.

i know it's not an optimization issue. Your current pessimisation of 
even perfect TSCs _is_ an optimization issue.

(and note that if the TSC is unstable the guest will/should notice it 
and will fall back to the hyper clocksource)

	Ingo
-
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/