|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v6 05/36] KVM: x86: Add KVM_[GS]ET_CLOCK_GUEST for accurate KVM clock migration
On Fri, 2026-07-24 at 14:17 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Fri, Jul 03, 2026, David Woodhouse wrote: > > From: Jack Allister <jalliste@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > In the common case (where kvm->arch.use_master_clock is true), the KVM > > clock is defined as a simple arithmetic function of the guest TSC, based > > on a reference point stored in kvm->arch.master_kernel_ns and > > kvm->arch.master_cycle_now. > > > > The existing KVM_[GS]ET_CLOCK functionality does not allow for this > > relationship to be precisely saved and restored by userspace. All it can > > currently do is set the KVM clock at a given UTC reference time, which > > is necessarily imprecise. > > > > So on live update, the guest TSC can remain cycle accurate at precisely > > the same offset from the host TSC, but there is no way for userspace to > > restore the KVM clock accurately. > > > > Even on live migration to a new host, where the accuracy of the guest > > time-keeping is fundamentally limited by the accuracy of wallclock > > synchronization between the source and destination hosts, the clock jump > > experienced by the guest's TSC and its KVM clock should at least be > > *consistent*. Even when the guest TSC suffers a discontinuity, its KVM > > clock should still remain the *same* arithmetic function of the guest > > TSC, and not suffer an *additional* discontinuity. > > > > To allow for accurate migration of the KVM clock, add per-vCPU ioctls > > which save and restore the actual PV clock info in > > pvclock_vcpu_time_info. > > > > The restoration in KVM_SET_CLOCK_GUEST works by creating a new reference > > point in time just as kvm_update_masterclock() does, and calculating the > > corresponding guest TSC value. This guest TSC value is then passed > > through the user-provided pvclock structure to generate the *intended* > > KVM clock value at that point in time, and through the *actual* KVM > > clock calculation. Then kvm->arch.kvmclock_offset is adjusted to > > eliminate the difference. > > > > Where kvm->arch.use_master_clock is false (because the host TSC is > > unreliable, or the guest TSCs are configured strangely), the KVM clock > > is *not* defined as a function of the guest TSC so KVM_GET_CLOCK_GUEST > > returns an error. In this case, as documented, userspace shall use the > > legacy KVM_GET_CLOCK ioctl. The loss of precision is acceptable in this > > case since the clocks are imprecise in this mode anyway. > > > > On *restoration*, if kvm->arch.use_master_clock is false, an error is > > returned for similar reasons and userspace shall fall back to using > > KVM_SET_CLOCK. This does mean that, as documented, userspace needs to > > use *both* KVM_GET_CLOCK_GUEST and KVM_GET_CLOCK and send both results > > with the migration data (unless the intent is to refuse to resume on a > > host with bad TSC). > > Please post this as a standalone mini-series. AFAICT, the only dependency of > any kind is a minor conflict with the s/hw_tsc_khz/hw_tsc_hz change, and > that's > trivial to sort out later on. Hm? The calculations in kvm_vcpu_ioctl_set_clock_guest() are all Hz- based, not kHz. This *was* the start of the series (Jack posted it on its own in 2024), and I thought I'd moved the khz/hz thing to live before it on purpose? The kvm_xen_shared_info_init() one could be later, I guess. But is also trivial (and its commit message sets the stage for a bunch of the cleanups by analysing the various *different* ways that kvmclock gets derived). I confess I'm not stunningly keen on breaking the series up. How about we just do it in stages? Merge patch 1 as it's fairly trivial, and then I can use its commit ID when I refer to its taxonomy later. Then we can do patches 2-6 which are the KVM_[GS]ET_CLOCK_GUEST support. And I can repost the remainder on top of that? > > +4.145 KVM_GET_CLOCK_GUEST > > +---------------------------- > > + > > +:Capability: none > > Why not add a CAP? The check in the subsequent selftest is quite gross. Because nobody would ever use it in practice anyway. Even if the ioctl is present, you *still* have to try it and fall back to the old method because there are ways that a *guest* can force master clock mode off. Attachment:
smime.p7s
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |