Re: [PATCH v5 13/14] x86/tsc: Mark Secure TSC as reliable clocksource

Nikunj A. Dadhania
2023-11-02T12:16:48Z

On 11/2/2023 5:37 PM, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> On 11/2/2023 4:03 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 11:23:34AM +0530, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
>>> On 10/30/2023 10:48 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>>> On 10/29/23 23:36, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
>>>>> index 15f97c0abc9d..b0a8546d3703 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
>>>>> @@ -1241,7 +1241,7 @@ static void __init check_system_tsc_reliable(void)
>>>>> tsc_clocksource_reliable = 1;
>>>>> }
>>>>> #endif
>>>>> - if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE))
>>>>> + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE) || cc_platform_has(CC_ATTR_GUEST_SECURE_TSC))
>>>>> tsc_clocksource_reliable = 1;
>>>>
>>>> Why can't you just set X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE?
>>>
>>> Last time when I tried, I had removed my kvmclock changes and I had set
>>> the X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE similar to Kirill's patch[1], this did not
>>> select the SecureTSC.
>>>
>>> Let me try setting X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE and retaining my patch for
>>> skipping kvmclock.
>>
>> kvmclock lowers its rating if TSC is good enough:
>>
>> if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CONSTANT_TSC) &&
>> boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_NONSTOP_TSC) &&
>> !check_tsc_unstable())
>> kvm_clock.rating = 299;
>>
>> Does your TSC meet the requirements?
>
> I have set TscInvariant (bit 8) in CPUID_8000_0007_edx and TSC is set as reliable.
>
> With this I see kvm_clock rating being lowered, but kvm-clock is still being picked as clock-source.

Ah.. at later point TSC is picked up, is this expected ?

[ 2.564052] clocksource: Switched to clocksource kvm-clock
[ 2.678136] clocksource: Switched to clocksource tsc

Regards
Nikunj