Re: Time and KVM - best practices
On 03/21/2010 01:29 PM, Thomas Løcke wrote: Hey, What is considered best practice when running a KVM host with a mixture of Linux and Windows guests? Currently I have ntpd running on the host, and I start my guests using -rtc base=localhost,clock=host, with an extra -tdf added for Windows guests, just to keep their clock from drifting madly during load. But with this setup, all my guests are constantly 1-2 seconds behind the host. I can live with that for the Windows guests, as they are not Is it just during boot time? If you run ntpdate after the boot inside the guest, does the time is 100% in sync with the host from that moment on? Glauber once analyzed it and blames hwclock call in rc.sysinit running anything that depends heavily on the time being set perfect, but for some of the Linux guests it's an issue. Would I be better of using ntpd and -rtc base=localhost,clock=vm for all the Linux guests, or is there some other magic way of ensuring that the clock is perfectly in sync with the host? Perhaps there are some kernel configuration I can do to optimize the host for KVM? Jan is the expert here, but last I checked clock=vm is not appropriate since this is virtual time and not host time - if qemu is stopped/migrated you won't notice it with virtual time withing the guest but the drift will grow. I'm currently using QEMU PC emulator version 0.12.50 (qemu-kvm-devel) because version 0.12.30 did not work well at all with Windows guests, and the kernel in both host and Linux guests is 2.6.33.1 :o) /Thomas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Time and KVM - best practices
On 22.03.2010, at 10:15, Dor Laor wrote: On 03/21/2010 01:29 PM, Thomas Løcke wrote: Hey, What is considered best practice when running a KVM host with a mixture of Linux and Windows guests? Currently I have ntpd running on the host, and I start my guests using -rtc base=localhost,clock=host, with an extra -tdf added for Windows guests, just to keep their clock from drifting madly during load. But with this setup, all my guests are constantly 1-2 seconds behind the host. I can live with that for the Windows guests, as they are not Is it just during boot time? If you run ntpdate after the boot inside the guest, does the time is 100% in sync with the host from that moment on? Glauber once analyzed it and blames hwclock call in rc.sysinit In fact, my kvm-clock based guests lag about 1 second behind as well. I suppose there's some compensation code that doesn't work correctly. Alex-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Time and KVM - best practices
Dor Laor wrote: On 03/21/2010 01:29 PM, Thomas Løcke wrote: Hey, What is considered best practice when running a KVM host with a mixture of Linux and Windows guests? Currently I have ntpd running on the host, and I start my guests using -rtc base=localhost,clock=host, with an extra -tdf added for Windows guests, just to keep their clock from drifting madly during load. But with this setup, all my guests are constantly 1-2 seconds behind the host. I can live with that for the Windows guests, as they are not Is it just during boot time? If you run ntpdate after the boot inside the guest, does the time is 100% in sync with the host from that moment on? Glauber once analyzed it and blames hwclock call in rc.sysinit running anything that depends heavily on the time being set perfect, but for some of the Linux guests it's an issue. Would I be better of using ntpd and -rtc base=localhost,clock=vm for all the Linux guests, or is there some other magic way of ensuring that the clock is perfectly in sync with the host? Perhaps there are some kernel configuration I can do to optimize the host for KVM? Jan is the expert here, but last I checked clock=vm is not appropriate since this is virtual time and not host time - if qemu is stopped/migrated you won't notice it with virtual time withing the guest but the drift will grow. Don't know what Windows does with the RTC, but the idea behind -rtc clock=host is to provide an accurate time source to guest without paravirtualized guest kernel drivers or an ntp installation in the guest. Last time I checked, hwclock run in a Linux guest was in sync with the host system time. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Time and KVM - best practices
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Jan Kiszka jan.kis...@siemens.com wrote: Don't know what Windows does with the RTC, but the idea behind -rtc clock=host is to provide an accurate time source to guest without paravirtualized guest kernel drivers or an ntp installation in the guest. Last time I checked, hwclock run in a Linux guest was in sync with the host system time. This is not the case with a 2.6.33.1 host and 2.6.33.1 guests. The clock drifts. Using -rtc base=localtime,clock=host and no ntpd in guest: Clock starts out ~1 second behind host. After a few days of uptime, the guest clock is now ahead of host with ~7 seconds. Using -rtc base=localtime,clock=vm and ntpd in guest: Clock starts out ~1 second behind host. After a few days of uptime, the guest clock is in perfect sync with host clock. I'm currently using qemu-kvm 0.12.50, as that version is much better in regards to keeping time in my Windows guests than 0.12.30. IFAIK there are no differences between 0.12.30 and 0.12.50 and time-keeping in Linux guests. They seem to act similar. I've tried the following kernels for both host and guests: 2.6.29.6, 2.6.33 and 2.6.33.1. They all exhibit the same behavior. I've used the stock Slackware kernel config for all the kernels. Can it be that Slackware is missing some crucial kernel setting to manage time correct in relation to KVM? Regards, /Thomas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Time and KVM - best practices
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:55:18AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote: On 22.03.2010, at 10:15, Dor Laor wrote: On 03/21/2010 01:29 PM, Thomas Løcke wrote: Hey, What is considered best practice when running a KVM host with a mixture of Linux and Windows guests? Currently I have ntpd running on the host, and I start my guests using -rtc base=localhost,clock=host, with an extra -tdf added for Windows guests, just to keep their clock from drifting madly during load. But with this setup, all my guests are constantly 1-2 seconds behind the host. I can live with that for the Windows guests, as they are not Is it just during boot time? If you run ntpdate after the boot inside the guest, does the time is 100% in sync with the host from that moment on? Glauber once analyzed it and blames hwclock call in rc.sysinit In fact, my kvm-clock based guests lag about 1 second behind as well. I suppose there's some compensation code that doesn't work correctly. The problem I found, is that we read wallclock information from kvm host, but later on boot, we call the hwclock binary, which adjusts things as it sees fit. So in this scenario, kvmclock wallclock time is just not being used at all. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Time and KVM - best practices
Hey, What is considered best practice when running a KVM host with a mixture of Linux and Windows guests? Currently I have ntpd running on the host, and I start my guests using -rtc base=localhost,clock=host, with an extra -tdf added for Windows guests, just to keep their clock from drifting madly during load. But with this setup, all my guests are constantly 1-2 seconds behind the host. I can live with that for the Windows guests, as they are not running anything that depends heavily on the time being set perfect, but for some of the Linux guests it's an issue. Would I be better of using ntpd and -rtc base=localhost,clock=vm for all the Linux guests, or is there some other magic way of ensuring that the clock is perfectly in sync with the host? Perhaps there are some kernel configuration I can do to optimize the host for KVM? I'm currently using QEMU PC emulator version 0.12.50 (qemu-kvm-devel) because version 0.12.30 did not work well at all with Windows guests, and the kernel in both host and Linux guests is 2.6.33.1 :o) /Thomas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
