Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "clock_montonic_raw".
Did you mean:
clock_monotonic_raw
2018 Oct 11
2
[patch 00/11] x86/vdso: Cleanups, simmplifications and CLOCK_TAI support
On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 01:09:42PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 AM Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 10:38:22AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 8:27 AM Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > > I read the comment three more times and
2018 Oct 11
2
[patch 00/11] x86/vdso: Cleanups, simmplifications and CLOCK_TAI support
On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 01:09:42PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:28 AM Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti at redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 10:38:22AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 8:27 AM Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > > I read the comment three more times and
2018 Oct 11
0
[patch 00/11] x86/vdso: Cleanups, simmplifications and CLOCK_TAI support
...o it this way?
>
> Since pvclock updates which update system_timestamp are expensive (must stop all vcpus),
> they should be avoided.
>
Fair enough.
> So only HW TSC counts
makes sense.
>, and used as offset against vcpu's tsc_timestamp.
>
Why don't you just expose CLOCK_MONTONIC_RAW or CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW
plus suspend time, though? Then you would actually be tracking a real
kernel timekeeping mode, and you wouldn't need all this complicated
offsetting work to avoid accidentally going backwards.