Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
From:   Paul Durrant <xadimgnik@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a2a13598-6d37-47a2-8a13-9963acb0f1e5@xen.org>
Date:   Tue, 31 Oct 2023 12:22:08 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Reply-To: paul@xen.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/xen: improve accuracy of Xen timers
Content-Language: en-US
To:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        Paul Durrant <xadimgnik@gmail.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
References: <96da7273adfff2a346de9a4a27ce064f6fe0d0a1.camel@infradead.org>
 <1a679274-bbff-4549-a1ea-c7ea9f1707cc@xen.org>
 <F80266DD-D7EF-4A26-B9F8-BC33EC65F444@infradead.org>
 <6c9671b4-d997-42ac-9821-06accb97357f@xen.org>
 <1DCDC3DB-81E8-426C-AF4B-AA7CA2C1271E@infradead.org>
Organization: Xen Project
In-Reply-To: <1DCDC3DB-81E8-426C-AF4B-AA7CA2C1271E@infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 31/10/2023 12:11, David Woodhouse wrote:
> 
> 
> On 31 October 2023 12:06:17 GMT, Paul Durrant <xadimgnik@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 31/10/2023 11:42, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>> Secondly, it's also wrong thing to do in the general case. Let's say KVM does its thing and snaps the kvmclock backwards in time on a KVM_REQ_CLOCK_UPDATE... do we really want to reinterpret existing timers against the new kvmclock? They were best left alone, I think.
>>
>> Do we not want to do exactly that? If the master clock is changed, why would we not want to re-interpret the guest's idea of time? That update will be visible to the guest when it re-reads the PV clock source.
> 
> Well no, because the guest set that timer *before* we yanked the clock from under it, and probably wants it interpreted in the time scale which was in force at the time it was set.
> 
> But more to the point, KVM shouldn't be doing that! We need to *fix* the kvmclock brokenness, not design further band-aids around it.

Ok, fair enough.

> 
> As I said, this patch stands even *after* we fix kvmclock, because it handles the timer delta calculation from an single TSC read.
> 
> But overengineering a timer reset on KVM_REQ_CLOCK_UPDATE would not.

I'm not sure what you intend to do to kvmlock, so not sure whether we'll 
still need the __pvclock_read_cycles(&vcpu->arch.hv_clock, guest_tsc) 
but this patch (with the extra check on validity of hv_clock) does fix 
the drift so...

Reviewed-by: Paul Durrant <paul@xen.org>