[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00/13] Add VMX TSC scaling support

Hi Jan, Boris and Aravind,

(Sorry for sending such a long email and thanks for your patience)

Because this patchset also touches the existing SVM TSC ratio code, I
tested it on an AMD machine with an AMD A10-7700K CPU (3.4 GHz) that
supports SVM TSC ratio. There are two goals of the test:
 (1) Check whether this patchset works well for SVM TSC ratio.
 (2) Check whether the existing SVM TSC ratio code works correctly.

  The detailed testing process is boring and long, so I put the
  conclusions first.

  According to the following test,
  (1) this patchset works well for SVM TSC ratio, and
  (2) the existing SVM TSC ratio code does not work correctly.

* Preliminary bug fix

  Before testing (specially for goal (2)), I have to fix another bug
  found in the current svm_get_tsc_offset() (commit e08f383):

  static uint64_t svm_get_tsc_offset(uint64_t host_tsc, uint64_t guest_tsc,
    uint64_t ratio)
      uint64_t offset;

      if (ratio == DEFAULT_TSC_RATIO)
          return guest_tsc - host_tsc;

      /* calculate hi,lo parts in 64bits to prevent overflow */
      offset = (((host_tsc >> 32U) * (ratio >> 32U)) << 32U) +
            (host_tsc & 0xffffffffULL) * (ratio & 0xffffffffULL);
            ^^ wrong

      return guest_tsc - offset;

  Looking at the AMD's spec about TSC ratio MSR and where this function is
  called, it's expected to calculate
      guest_tsc - (host_tsc * ratio) >> 32
  but above underlined code is definitely not "(host_tsc * ratio) >> 32",
  and above function will return a much larger result than
  expected if (guest TSC rate / host TSC rate) > 1. In practice, it
  could result the guest TSC jumping to several years later after
  migration (which I came across and was confuse by in this test).

  This bug can be fixed either later by patch 5 which introduces a
  common function hvm_scale_tsc() to scale TSC, or by replacing above
  underlined code with a simplified and inlined version of
  hvm_scale_tsc() as below:
      uint64_t mult, frac;
      mult    = ratio >> 32;
      frac    = ratio & ((1ULL << 32) - 1);
      offset  = host_tsc * mult;
      offset += (host_tsc >> 32) * frac;
      offset += ((host_tsc & ((1ULL << 32) - 1)) * frac) >> 32;
  For testing goal (2), I apply the latter fix.

* Test for goal (1)

  * Environment
    (1) Xen (commit e08f383)
    (2) Host Linux kernel 3.19.0
    (3) Guest Linux kernel 3.19.0 & 4.2.0

  * Process
    (1) Apply the whole patchset on commit e08f383.

    (2) Launch a HVM domain from the configuration xl-high.cfg (in

        Expected: The guest Linux should boot normally in the domain.

    (3) Execute the command "dmesg | grep -i tsc" in the guest Linux
        to check the TSC rate detected by the guest Linux.

        Expected: Suppose the detected TSC rate is 'gtsc_khz' in KHz,
                  then it should be as close to the value of 'vtsc_khz'
                  option in xl-high.cfg as possible.

    (4) Execute the program "./test_tsc <nr_secs> gtsc_khz" to check
        whether the guest TSC rate is synchronized with the wall clock.
        The code of test_tsc is also in the attachment. It records the
        beginning and ending TSC values (tsc0 and tsc1) for a period
        of nr_secs and outputs the result of
        (tsc1 - tsc0) / (gtsc_khz * 1000).

        Expected: The output should be as close to nr_secs as possible.

     Follows test the migration.

     (5) Save the current domain by "xl save hvm-test saved_domain".

     (6) Restore the domain.

     (7) Take above step (4) again to check whether the guest TSC rate
         is still synchronized with the wall clock.

         Expected: the same as step (5)

     (8) Switch to the configuration xl-low.cfg and take above
         steps (2) ~ (6) again.

  * Results (OK: All as expected)
    First round w/ xl-high.cfg (vtsc_khz = 4000000):
    (3) gtsc_khz = 4000000 KHz
    (4) ./test_tsc 10 4000000   outputs: Passed 9.99895 s
        ./test_tsc 3600 4000000 outputs: Passed 3599.99754 s
    (7) ./test_tsc 10 4000000   outputs: Passed 9.99885 s
        ./test_tsc 3600 4000000 outputs: Passed 3599.98987 s

    Second round w/ xl-low.cfg (vtsc_khz = 2000000):
    (3) gtsc_khz = 2000000 KHz
    (4) ./test_tsc 10 4000000   outputs: Passed 9.99886 s
        ./test_tsc 3600 4000000 outputs: Passed 3599.99810 s
    (7) ./test_tsc 10 4000000   outputs: Passed 9.99885 s
        ./test_tsc 3600 4000000 outputs: Passed 3599.99853 s

   I also switched the clocksource of guest Linux to 'hpet' and got
   very similar results to above.

* Test for goal (2)

  * Environment
    The same as above

  * Process
    (1) ~ (5): the same as above.
    (6) Reboot to Xen hypervisor and toolstack w/o this patchset but
        w/ the bug fix at the beginning and restore the domain.
    (7) the same as above.

  * Results (Failed)
    (7) ./test_tsc 10 4000000 outputs: Passed 63.319284 s

* Conclusion

  This patchset works well for SVM TSC ratio and fixes existing bugs
  in SVM TSC ratio code.

Thanks for your patience to read such a long email,

Attachment: test_tsc.c
Description: Text document

Attachment: xl-high.cfg
Description: Text document

Attachment: xl-low.cfg
Description: Text document

Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.