From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Chmielewski Subject: Re: Houston, we have May 15, 1953 (says guest when host uses cpufreq, and dies) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 10:20:32 +0100 Message-ID: <499D2460.60201@wpkg.org> References: <499C206A.5050109@wpkg.org> <499C3131.3030601@codemonkey.ws> <499C3327.3090207@wpkg.org> <499C3E6E.4050807@redhat.com> <499C7196.7050001@codemonkey.ws> <499D232A.7040206@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Anthony Liguori , Avi Kivity , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Gerd Hoffmann Return-path: Received: from mx03.syneticon.net ([78.111.66.105]:39999 "EHLO mx03.syneticon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754312AbZBSJUe (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2009 04:20:34 -0500 In-Reply-To: <499D232A.7040206@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Gerd Hoffmann schrieb: > Anthony Liguori wrote: >> Are you suggesting that one should use cpufreq on a CPU without a >> constant tsc? Isn't this just asking for trouble? > > Depends on the (guest) clock source ;) > > tsc isn't going to do well obviously. > > kvmclock is designed to handle tsc frequency changes just fine. > And with the kvm-84 kernel module it actually works correctly. So with Linux virtio guests I may have luck, but not so with Windows, which can't (yet?) use kvm-clock. Correct? (it may be some time before I'm able to upgrade and check how it really works). -- Tomasz Chmielewski http://wpkg.org