From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@gmail.com>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: "Cao jin" <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"Michael Tokarev" <mjt@tls.msk.ru>,
"Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>,
"Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com>,
"open list:All patches CC here" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] timer.h: Provide monotonic time for ARM guests
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 11:56:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <507aa35d-83dc-2861-ab3f-1e185da8ca02@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJhHMCBKQyOd8ZoDZWDV=NDu1PCx=6M8K1S0pfOr__H2TsR8sw@mail.gmail.com>
On 17/04/2017 20:55, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>> +/* ARM does not have a user-space readble cycle counter available.
>>> + * This is a compromise to get monotonically increasing time.
>>> + */
>>> +static inline int64_t cpu_get_host_ticks(void)
>>> +{
>>> + return get_clock();
>>> +}
>> This doesn't look like it should be ARM-specific. Is it
>> better than the current default implementation? If so,
>> why not make this the default implementation?
>
> I think we can do that...
Yes, it is always better for emulation accuracy. It may be much slower,
depending on your OS (especially if get_clock requires a
user->kernel->user transition), but the current code is quite broken.
Paolo
>>> +
>>> #else
>>> /* The host CPU doesn't have an easily accessible cycle counter.
>>> Just return a monotonically increasing value. This will be
>> The comment here says that our default is already a monotonically
>> increasing implementation -- is it wrong, or is there some other
>> advantage of your version?
> Comment #6 in the bug report by Laszlo Ersek explains why.
> Incrementing by 1 for approximately 55 ms is what is causing the
> divide by zero in grub.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-18 9:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-15 19:29 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] timer.h: Provide monotonic time for ARM guests Pranith Kumar
2017-04-17 18:42 ` Peter Maydell
2017-04-17 18:55 ` Pranith Kumar
2017-04-18 9:56 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2017-04-18 19:19 ` Pranith Kumar
2017-04-20 13:58 ` Peter Maydell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=507aa35d-83dc-2861-ab3f-1e185da8ca02@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=alex.bennee@linaro.org \
--cc=bobby.prani@gmail.com \
--cc=caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=edgar.iglesias@xilinx.com \
--cc=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).