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;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of arm.com designates
 63.35.35.123 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=63.35.35.123; helo=64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com;
From:   Jianyong Wu <Jianyong.Wu@arm.com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
CC:     "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "yangbo.lu@nxp.com" <yangbo.lu@nxp.com>,
        "john.stultz@linaro.org" <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        "sean.j.christopherson@intel.com" <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        "richardcochran@gmail.com" <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
        Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>,
        "will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>,
        Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>,
        Steven Price <Steven.Price@arm.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu" <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
        "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Steve Capper <Steve.Capper@arm.com>,
        Kaly Xin <Kaly.Xin@arm.com>, Justin He <Justin.He@arm.com>,
        nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64
Thread-Topic: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64
Thread-Index: AQHVrwu1ZTEnzkrQbEOo/hXDFqaU6affG9SAgALmpVA=
Date:   Thu, 9 Jan 2020 05:59:44 +0000
Message-ID: <HE1PR0801MB1676EE12CF0DB7C5BB8CC62DF4390@HE1PR0801MB1676.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20191210034026.45229-1-jianyong.wu@arm.com>
 <20191210034026.45229-8-jianyong.wu@arm.com>
 <ca162efb3a0de530e119f5237c006515@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <ca162efb3a0de530e119f5237c006515@kernel.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Authentication-Results-Original: spf=none (sender IP is )
 smtp.mailfrom=Jianyong.Wu@arm.com; 
nodisclaimer: True
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: arm.com does not designate
 permitted sender hosts)
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info-Original: 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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0801MB1628
Original-Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is )
 smtp.mailfrom=Jianyong.Wu@arm.com; 
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStripped: DB5EUR03FT019.eop-EUR03.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:63.35.35.123;IPV:CAL;SCL:-1;CTRY:IE;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(136003)(376002)(39860400002)(346002)(13464003)(199004)(189003)(9686003)(7696005)(8936002)(4001150100001)(81166006)(8676002)(6506007)(81156014)(186003)(55016002)(5660300002)(86362001)(26005)(53546011)(450100002)(356004)(2906002)(33656002)(478600001)(26826003)(336012)(54906003)(316002)(52536014)(70206006)(6862004)(70586007)(4326008);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:AM6PR08MB3176;H:64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com;FPR:;SPF:Pass;LANG:en;PTR:ec2-63-35-35-123.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com;A:1;MX:1;
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id-Prvs: 4f5da827-dcef-4c7a-1e44-08d794c92007
X-Forefront-PRVS: 02778BF158
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 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
X-OriginatorOrg: arm.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2020 05:59:53.4225
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: a0bfb2b8-a060-445e-dadf-08d794c92586
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: f34e5979-57d9-4aaa-ad4d-b122a662184d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=f34e5979-57d9-4aaa-ad4d-b122a662184d;Ip=[63.35.35.123];Helo=[64aa7808-outbound-1.mta.getcheckrecipient.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM6PR08MB3176
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Marc,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 5:29 PM
> To: Jianyong Wu <Jianyong.Wu@arm.com>
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; yangbo.lu@nxp.com; john.stultz@linaro.org;
> tglx@linutronix.de; pbonzini@redhat.com; sean.j.christopherson@intel.com;
> richardcochran@gmail.com; Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@arm.com>;
> will@kernel.org; Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>; Steven Price
> <Steven.Price@arm.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> kernel@lists.infradead.org; kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu;
> kvm@vger.kernel.org; Steve Capper <Steve.Capper@arm.com>; Kaly Xin
> <Kaly.Xin@arm.com>; Justin He <Justin.He@arm.com>; nd <nd@arm.com>
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64
>=20
> On 2019-12-10 03:40, Jianyong Wu wrote:
> > Currently in arm64 virtualization environment, there is no mechanism
> > to keep time sync between guest and host. Time in guest will drift
> > compared with host after boot up as they may both use third party time
> > sources to correct their time respectively. The time deviation will be
> > in order of milliseconds but some scenarios ask for higher time
> > precision, like in cloud envirenment, we want all the VMs running in
> > the host aquire the same level accuracy from host clock.
> >
> > Use of kvm ptp clock, which choose the host clock source clock as a
> > reference clock to sync time clock between guest and host has been
> > adopted by x86 which makes the time sync order from milliseconds to
> > nanoseconds.
> >
> > This patch enable kvm ptp on arm64 and we get the similar clock drift
> > as found with x86 with kvm ptp.
> >
> > Test result comparison between with kvm ptp and without it in arm64
> > are as follows. This test derived from the result of command 'chronyc
> > sources'. we should take more cure of the last sample column which
> > shows the offset between the local clock and the source at the last
> > measurement.
> >
> > no kvm ptp in guest:
> > MS Name/IP address   Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample
> >
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    13  +1040us[+1581us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    21  +1040us[+1581us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    29  +1040us[+1581us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    37  +1040us[+1581us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    45  +1040us[+1581us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    53  +1040us[+1581us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    61  +1040us[+1581us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377     4   -130us[ +796us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    12   -130us[ +796us] +/-
> > 21ms
> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn      2   6   377    20   -130us[ +796us] +/-
> > 21ms
> >
> > in host:
> > MS Name/IP address   Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample
> >
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377    72   -470us[ -603us] +/-
> > 18ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377    92   -470us[ -603us] +/-
> > 18ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377   112   -470us[ -603us] +/-
> > 18ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377     2   +872ns[-6808ns] +/-
> > 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377    22   +872ns[-6808ns] +/-
> > 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377    43   +872ns[-6808ns] +/-
> > 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377    63   +872ns[-6808ns] +/-
> > 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377    83   +872ns[-6808ns] +/-
> > 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377   103   +872ns[-6808ns] +/-
> > 17ms
> > ^* 120.25.115.20          2   7   377   123   +872ns[-6808ns] +/-
> > 17ms
> >
> > The dns1.synet.edu.cn is the network reference clock for guest and
> > 120.25.115.20 is the network reference clock for host. we can't get
> > the clock error between guest and host directly, but a roughly
> > estimated value will be in order of hundreds of us to ms.
> >
> > with kvm ptp in guest:
> > chrony has been disabled in host to remove the disturb by network
> > clock.
> >
> > MS Name/IP address         Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample
> >
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377     8     -7ns[   +1ns] +/-
> > 3ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377     8     +1ns[  +16ns] +/-
> > 3ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377     6     -4ns[   -0ns] +/-
> > 6ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377     6     -8ns[  -12ns] +/-
> > 5ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377     5     +2ns[   +4ns] +/-
> > 4ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377    13     +2ns[   +4ns] +/-
> > 4ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377    12     -4ns[   -6ns] +/-
> > 4ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377    11     -8ns[  -11ns] +/-
> > 6ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377    10    -14ns[  -20ns] +/-
> > 4ns
> > * PHC0                    0   3   377     8     +4ns[   +5ns] +/-
> > 4ns
> >
> > The PHC0 is the ptp clock which choose the host clock as its source
> > clock. So we can be sure to say that the clock error between host and
> > guest is in order of ns.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jianyong Wu <jianyong.wu@arm.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 22 ++++++++++++
> >  drivers/ptp/Kconfig                  |  2 +-
> >  drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c          | 53
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  3 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)  create mode 100644
> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > index 277846decd33..72260b66f02e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> > @@ -1636,3 +1636,25 @@ static int __init arch_timer_acpi_init(struct
> > acpi_table_header *table)  }  TIMER_ACPI_DECLARE(arch_timer,
> > ACPI_SIG_GTDT, arch_timer_acpi_init);  #endif
> > +
> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM)
> > +#include <linux/arm-smccc.h>
> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp(unsigned long *cycle, struct
> > timespec64 *ts,
> > +			      struct clocksource **cs)
> > +{
> > +	struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res;
> > +	ktime_t ktime_overall;
> > +
> > +
> 	arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU
> NC_ID, &hvc_res);
> > +	if ((long)(hvc_res.a0) < 0)
> > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> > +	ktime_overall =3D hvc_res.a0 << 32 | hvc_res.a1;
> > +	*ts =3D ktime_to_timespec64(ktime_overall);
> > +	*cycle =3D hvc_res.a2 << 32 | hvc_res.a3;
>=20
> So why isn't that just a read of the virtual counter, given that what you=
 do in
> the hypervisor seems to be "cntpct - cntvoff"?
>=20
> What am I missing here?
>=20
We need get clock time and counter cycle at the same time, so we can't just=
 read virtual counter
at guest and must get it from host.

> > +	*cs =3D &clocksource_counter;
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp);
> > +#endif
> > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig index
> > 9b8fee5178e8..3c31ff8eb05f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig
> > @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH  config
> > PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM
> >  	tristate "KVM virtual PTP clock"
> >  	depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK
> > -	depends on KVM_GUEST && X86
> > +	depends on KVM_GUEST && X86 || ARM64 && ARM_ARCH_TIMER
> >  	default y
> >  	help
> >  	  This driver adds support for using kvm infrastructure as a PTP
> > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c b/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c
> > new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..f3f957117865
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > +/*
> > + *  Virtual PTP 1588 clock for use with KVM guests
> > + *  Copyright (C) 2019 ARM Ltd.
> > + *  All Rights Reserved
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> > +#include <linux/err.h>
> > +#include <asm/hypervisor.h>
> > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/psci.h>
> > +#include <linux/arm-smccc.h>
> > +#include <linux/timecounter.h>
> > +#include <linux/sched/clock.h>
> > +#include <asm/arch_timer.h>
> > +
> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_init(void)
> > +{
> > +	struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res;
> > +
> > +
> 	arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU
> NC_ID,
> > +			     &hvc_res);
> > +	if ((long)(hvc_res.a0) < 0)
> > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock_generic(struct timespec64 *ts,
> > +				   struct arm_smccc_res *hvc_res) {
> > +	ktime_t ktime_overall;
> > +
> > +
> 	arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU
> NC_ID,
> > +				  hvc_res);
> > +	if ((long)(hvc_res->a0) < 0)
> > +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> > +	ktime_overall =3D hvc_res->a0 << 32 | hvc_res->a1;
> > +	*ts =3D ktime_to_timespec64(ktime_overall);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock(struct timespec64 *ts) {
> > +	struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res;
> > +
> > +	kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock_generic(ts, &hvc_res);
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
>=20
> I also wonder why this is all arm64 specific, while everything should als=
o work
> just fine on 32bit.
>
ptp_kvm is a feature for cloud computing to keep time consistency from cont=
ainer to container and to host on server,
So we focus it on arm64. Also I have never tested it on arm32 machine ( we =
lack of arm32 machine)
Do you think it's necessary to enable ptp_kvm on arm32? If so, I can do tha=
t.
=20
Thanks
Jianyong

>          M.
> --
> Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...