On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:51 AM Miklos Szeredi <mik...@szeredi.hu> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 10:43 PM Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Miklos Szeredi <mik...@szeredi.hu> writes:
> > > Bisected it to:
> > >
> > > b95a8a27c300 ("x86/vdso: Use generic VDSO clock mode storage")
> > >
> > > The effect observed is that after the host is resumed, the clock in
> > > the guest is somewhat in the future and is stopped. I.e. repeated
> > > date(1) invocations show the same time.
> >
> > TBH, the bisect does not make any sense at all. It's renaming the
> > constants and moving the storage space and I just read it line for line
> > again that the result is equivalent. I'll have a look once the merge
> > window dust settles a bit.
>
> Yet, reverting just that single commit against latest linus tree fixes
> the issue. Which I think is a pretty good indication that that commit
> *is* doing something.
>
> The jump forward is around 35 minutes; that seems to be consistent as well.
Oh, and here's a dmesg extract for the good case:
[ 26.402239] clocksource: timekeeping watchdog on CPU0: Marking
clocksource 'tsc' as unstable because the skew is too large:
[ 26.407029] clocksource: 'kvm-clock' wd_now:
635480f3c wd_last: 3ce94a718 mask: ffffffffffffffff
[ 26.407632] clocksource: 'tsc' cs_now:
92d2e5d08 cs_last: 81305ceee mask: ffffffffffffffff
[ 26.409097] tsc: Marking TSC unstable due to clocksource watchdog
and the bad one:
[ 36.667576] clocksource: timekeeping watchdog on CPU1: Marking
clocksource 'tsc' as unstable because the skew is too large:
[ 36.690441] clocksource: 'kvm-clock' wd_now:
89885027c wd_last: 3ea987282 mask: ffffffffffffffff
[ 36.690994] clocksource: 'tsc' cs_now:
95666ec22 cs_last: 84e747930 mask: ffffffffffffffff
[ 36.691901] tsc: Marking TSC unstable due to clocksource watchdog
Thanks,
Miklos
