Re: [Xen-devel] rdtscP and xen (and maybe the app-tsc answer I've been looking for)

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>]

On 09/21/09 16:29, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>>> I think a race occurs if the vcpu switches pcpu TWICE
>>> from pcpu-A to pcpu-B and back to pcpu-A and does rdtscp
>>> each time on pcpu-A but reads one or more pvclock parameters
>>> (that are too big to be encoded in TSC_AUX) on pcpu-B.  
>>>       
>> That shouldn't matter.  Once the process has (tsc,cpu,version) it can
>> use its own local copy of cpu's pvclock parameters to compute the
>> tsc->ns conversion.  Once it has that triple, it doesn't matter if it
>> gets context-switched; the time computation doesn't depend on what CPU
>> is currently running. 
>>
>> It only needs to iterate if it gets a version mismatch.  You can
>> potentially get a livelock if the version is constantly 
>> changing between
>> the rdtscp and the get-pvclock-params, and exacerbated if the process
>> keeps bouncing between cpus between the two.  But given that the
>> rdtsc+get-params should take no more than a couple of microseconds, it
>> seems very unlikely the process is sustaining a megahertz CPU 
>> migration
>> rate.
>>     
> Yes, I neglected an important pre-condition.  ASSUME the first
> rdtscp on pcpu-A gets a version mismatch so that it must fetch
> the parameters again.  Then: the vcpu switches pcpu TWICE
> from pcpu-A to pcpu-B and back to pcpu-A and does rdtscp
> each time on pcpu-A but reads one or more pvclock parameters
> (that are too big to be encoded in TSC_AUX) on pcpu-B.
>
> I agree that this is vanishingly low probability but on
> a pcpu-oversubscribed machine I think it only takes one
> vcpu-to-pcpu reschedule and then a poorly timed interrupt that
> causes the vcpu to be unscheduled, and then later rescheduled
> on the original processor.
>   

Sure.  It just has to keep iterating until it gets consistency.  If it
iterates too long (10 times?  100? 1000?) it should give up and assume
something is inherently broken.

>> And even if it fails, the process always has to be prepared to go to
>> some other time source.
>>     
> And the issue is that there's no way to recognize
> failure.

Yeah, that's a basic problem with using naked tsc as a timebase.  Any
app using it needs to be prepared to test the tsc sanity against some
other time reference regularly.

On the other hand, using the tsc as part of a larger ABI works reliably.

This rdtscp proposal is basically the latter, as a variant of the
pvclock algorithm.  I'm mostly interested in it as an implementation for
vsyscall etc, rather than something that apps would use directly.

>  Unless... wait... are you assuming that
> every unscheduled period results in an adjustment
> of the pvclock offset parameter?  That results in
> "nanoseconds since guest boot during which any
> vcpu is running" rather than "nanoseconds since
> guest boot even when all vcpus are idle", right?
> That's different than what I had in mind, but I
> suppose it works.
>   

Not following you here.

    J

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel