[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/time: update TSC stamp on restore from deep C-state
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:40:27PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 15.01.2020 10:47, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 07:36:21PM +0000, Igor Druzhinin wrote: > >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/time.c > >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/time.c > >> @@ -955,10 +955,16 @@ u64 stime2tsc(s_time_t stime) > >> > >> void cstate_restore_tsc(void) > >> { > >> + struct cpu_time *t = &this_cpu(cpu_time); > >> + > >> if ( boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_NONSTOP_TSC) ) > >> return; > >> > >> - write_tsc(stime2tsc(read_platform_stime(NULL))); > >> + t->stamp.master_stime = read_platform_stime(NULL); > >> + t->stamp.local_tsc = stime2tsc(t->stamp.master_stime); > >> + t->stamp.local_stime = t->stamp.master_stime; > >> + > >> + write_tsc(t->stamp.local_tsc); > > > > In order to avoid the TSC write (and the likely associated vmexit), > > could you instead do: > > > > t->stamp.local_stime = t->stamp.master_stime = read_platform_stime(NULL); > > t->stamp.local_tsc = rdtsc_ordered(); > > > > I think it should achieve the same as it syncs the local TSC stamp and > > times, would avoid the TSC write and slightly simplifies the logic. > > Wouldn't this result in guests possibly observing the TSC moving > backwards? Isn't local_tsc storing a TSC value read from the same CPU always, and hence could only go backwards if rdtsc actually goes backwards? Ie: cpu_frequency_change seems to do something similar, together with a re-adjusting of the time scale, but doesn't perform any TSC write. Thanks, Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |