RE: [PATCH 2/2] hyperv: Implement Time Synchronization using host time sample
From: Thomas Shao
Date: Tue Oct 14 2014 - 10:13:11 EST
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcochran@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2014 9:26 PM
> To: Thomas Shao
> Cc: tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; olaf@xxxxxxxxx;
> apw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx; KY Srinivasan
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] hyperv: Implement Time Synchronization using host
> time sample
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 01:04:35PM +0000, Thomas Shao wrote:
> > > I really don't see the need for this. We have NTP. If the guests
> > > want to, they may use it. Otherwise, they have a free running clock, just
> like real machines.
> > >
> > Sometimes the user can't setup NTP. For example the guest OS didn't
> > have network connection. And in some cases, they may want the guest
> time sync with host.
> > With the existing hyper-v time source, the system clock will has
> > around 1.5 second time drift per day. If the workload in the host is heavy,
> the number could be larger.
> > So this feature is really useful for some scenarios.
> Any real machine without networking (and without GPS etc) will drift. That is
> just life, tough as it is. Why should we treat these guests any differently than
> real machines?
> Furthermore, without networking you really don't have a compelling need
> for correct absolute time in the first place.
The host machine can be configure with NTP. And in this case, making guest time sync
with host is useful.
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/