Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/5] Refactor and enhance RTC configuration

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>]

Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> Besides the interface thing, I'm also interesting in comments on the
>>> other core idea, the selectable RTC base clock. Do we want this knob? Do
>>> we want host_clock unconditionally? Or should the other RTC that
>>> currently use the host time already also gain vm_clock support over the
>>> time?
>>>  
>> Hard to say.  Doesn't the rtc keep track of wallclock time even on power 
>> off?  I think using host_clock unconditionally does actually make sense.
> 
> Sometimes it's useful to offset the emulated clock for one reason or
> another, hence the -startdate options.  But having it run at the
> correct speed is usually useful :-)

Indeed.

> 
> Also, sometimes (due to licenses with wallclock limits) it's useful
> for a guest to not see much time pass when the guest is powered off,
> although it still needs to be positive.

I'm not sure if this is a common use case. And it currently only seems
to be support by very few RTCs, the MC146818 being the most prominent one.

I'm now a fan of converting the latter to the common scheme of using the
host's system time (here via host_clock) and watch out for the need of
adding -rtc clock=vm.

> 
> Will the -startdate functionality be maintained with the RTC changes?

Yes, just like -localtime, this will still be supported of course.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux