[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v3 00/41] x86: Try to wrangle PV clocks vs. TSC
- To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 19:30:58 +0100
- Authentication-results: eu.smtp.expurgate.cloud; dkim=pass header.s=casper.20170209 header.d=infradead.org header.i="@infradead.org" header.h="MIME-Version:Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID"
- Cc: Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>, "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wei.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dexuan Cui <decui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Long Li <longli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ajay Kaher <ajay.kaher@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexey Makhalov <alexey.makhalov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxx>, John Stultz <jstultz@xxxxxxxxxx>, Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@xxxxxxxxx>, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx>, Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx>, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-coco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-hyperv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Michael Kelley <mhklinux@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@xxxxxxx>, Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@xxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Wed, 20 May 2026 18:31:29 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On Wed, 2026-05-20 at 10:59 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>
> > And then it even spent some time at boot actually using the kvmclock as
> > clocksource... when ideally I don't think it would even have *enabled*
> > it at all?
>
> Yeah, that's definitely the ideal state. And I had all the same expectations
> and
> observations as you when digging in and testing this. But unless this series
> makes things worse, I want punt on achieving the ideal state for the moment,
> as
> it's proving to be a big lift just to get to a not-awful state.
Ack. Just checking my understanding was correct. Baby steps... 40 patches at a
time :)
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
|
