Re: [PATCH RFC] handle tsc_tolerance during migration between identical hosts

[Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1182 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 11, Jan Beulich wrote:

> I'm afraid successful testing is not a sufficient criteria here. At
> the very least the (so far missing) documentation needs to very
> clearly point out the possible risks associated with using this
> option. But with there not being any functional change when
> the option is not being made use of, I don't think there's a
> reason not to add this (for the adventurous).

This can be handled by refering to the documentation of
'tsc_mode=native', which is what this change actually does.

> What I'm not sure about is whether having this as a global
> (instead of per-guest) setting is really all that useful: As
> different guests may require different tolerance, having a
> single unique setting may not allow people to get very far.

Another change on top of this, which adds a per-domU knob, could be
added. This also requires a decision if the per-domU or the global knob
has higher priority.

> > also on the name of the cmdline option?
> I'm trying to advocate for dashes instead of underscores, and
> I think it should say vtsc instead of tsc, to make clear it has an
> effect on guests only.

I will use "vtsc-tolerance=$khz".

Olaf

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 127 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel