Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] kvm: Use host timekeeping in guest.
To:     Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>, rkrcmar@redhat.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de
Cc:     john.stultz@linaro.org, sboyd@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
References: <20190920062713.78503-1-suleiman@google.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Message-ID: <1ec0b238-61a7-8353-026e-3a2ee23e6240@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 Sep 2019 09:48:03 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190920062713.78503-1-suleiman@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 20/09/19 08:27, Suleiman Souhlal wrote:
> To do that, I am changing kvmclock to request to the host to copy
> its timekeeping parameters (mult, base, cycle_last, etc), so that
> the guest timekeeper can use the same values, so that time can
> be synchronized between the guest and the host.
> 
> Any suggestions or feedback would be highly appreciated.

I'm not a timekeeping maintainer, but I don't think the
kernel/time/timekeeping.c changes are acceptable.

Is the PTP driver not enough?

Paolo