Re: [PATCH] allow userspace to adjust kvmclock offset

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 10/15/2009 04:58 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
>
>> The motivation for relative adjustment is when you have a jitter
>> resistant place to gather timing information (like the kernel, which can
>> disable interrupts and preemption), then pass it on to kvm without
>> losing information due to scheduling.  For migration there is no such
>> place since it involves two hosts, but it makes sense to support
>> relative adjustments.
>>      
> Since we added the padding you asked for, we could use that bit of information
> to define whether it will be a relative or absolute adjustment, then. Right now,
> I don't see the point of implementing a code path that will be completely untested.
>
> I'd leave it this way until someone comes up with a need.
>    

I agree with that, but padding by itself is insufficient.  You also need 
a flags field.

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