From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [patch 0/3] synchronized TSC between vcpu's on SMP guests Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 11:47:44 +0100 Message-ID: <20081209104744.GA8611@dmt.cnet> References: <20081209011247.570596925@localhost.localdomain> <493E58A0.8080109@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Avi Kivity , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Benjamin Serebrin To: Michael Tokarev Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:40186 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751950AbYLINuC (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Dec 2008 08:50:02 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <493E58A0.8080109@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 02:38:08PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote: > Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > Most Intel hosts are supposed to have their TSC's synchronized. This > > patchset attempts to fix the sites which overwrite the TSC making them > > appear unsynchronized to the guest. > > By the way, phenoms are also supposed to have synced TSCs, at least > the host reports TSC syncronization works. But guests still thinks > TSC is unstable, even on uniprocessor guests using kvm_clock... On uniprocessor guests? Perhaps, if the guest uses the vmmouse for example. In such case, is the TSC reported unstable right after boot? > Is it related to the area you're patching? > > Thanks! > > /mjt > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html