Re: [PATCH 11/17] Fix a possible backwards warp of kvmclock

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 06/16/2010 04:58 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 04:11:26PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>    
>> Zachary Amsden wrote:
>>      
>>> Kernel time, which advances in discrete steps may progress much slower
>>> than TSC.  As a result, when kvmclock is adjusted to a new base, the
>>> apparent time to the guest, which runs at a much higher, nsec scaled
>>> rate based on the current TSC, may have already been observed to have
>>> a larger value (kernel_ns + scaled tsc) than the value to which we are
>>> setting it (kernel_ns + 0).
>>>
>>>        
>> This is one issue of kvmclock which tries to supply a clocksource whose
>> precision may even higher than host.
>>      
> What if we export to the guest the current clock resolution, and when doing guest
> reads, simply chop whatever value we got to the lowest acceptable value?
>    

The clock resolution can change, and while we can expose it reliably 
through pvclock, do we need a notification so that the guest can update 
other internal structures?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function