Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.35 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.35;
Date:   Thu, 2 Nov 2023 13:33:06 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
To:     "Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@amd.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        thomas.lendacky@amd.com, x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        bp@alien8.de, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, dionnaglaze@google.com,
        pgonda@google.com, seanjc@google.com, pbonzini@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/14] x86/tsc: Mark Secure TSC as reliable clocksource
Message-ID: <20231102103306.v7ydmrobd5ibs4yn@box.shutemov.name>
References: <20231030063652.68675-1-nikunj@amd.com>
 <20231030063652.68675-14-nikunj@amd.com>
 <57d63309-51cd-4138-889d-43fbdf5ec790@intel.com>
 <ae267e31-5722-4784-9146-28bb13ca7cf5@amd.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ae267e31-5722-4784-9146-28bb13ca7cf5@amd.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 11:23:34AM +0530, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> On 10/30/2023 10:48 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On 10/29/23 23:36, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> > ...
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
> >> index 15f97c0abc9d..b0a8546d3703 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
> >> @@ -1241,7 +1241,7 @@ static void __init check_system_tsc_reliable(void)
> >>  			tsc_clocksource_reliable = 1;
> >>  	}
> >>  #endif
> >> -	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE))
> >> +	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE) || cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_GUEST_SECURE_TSC))
> >>  		tsc_clocksource_reliable = 1;
> > 
> > Why can't you just set X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE?
> 
> Last time when I tried, I had removed my kvmclock changes and I had set
> the X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE similar to Kirill's patch[1], this did not
> select the SecureTSC.
> 
> Let me try setting X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE and retaining my patch for
> skipping kvmclock.

kvmclock lowers its rating if TSC is good enough:

	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC) &&
	    boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_NONSTOP_TSC) &&
	    !check_tsc_unstable())
		kvm_clock.rating = 299;

Does your TSC meet the requirements?

-- 
  Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov