On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 01:53:32PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 09/05/2014 04:28, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
Alex,
Unability to upgrade systems is not an excuse to fix the bug in the
wrong place.
It may be an excuse to fix the bug in both places though.
Paolo
Actually, its messy to
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:26:37PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 09.05.14 13:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 09/05/2014 04:28, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
Alex,
Unability to upgrade systems is not an excuse to fix the bug in the
wrong place.
It may be an excuse to fix the bug in both
On 09.05.14 13:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 09/05/2014 04:28, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
Alex,
Unability to upgrade systems is not an excuse to fix the bug in the
wrong place.
It may be an excuse to fix the bug in both places though.
The bug in the kernel should be fixed differently
Il 09/05/2014 04:28, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
Alex,
Unability to upgrade systems is not an excuse to fix the bug in the
wrong place.
It may be an excuse to fix the bug in both places though.
Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
the body of a message to
On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 09:21:29AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 08.05.14 03:33, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:51:22PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
When we migrate we ask the kernel about its current belief on what the guest
time would be. However, I've seen cases where
Hi all,
On 06/05/14 08:16, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 06.05.14 01:23, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
1) By what algorithm you retrieve
and compare time in kvmclock guest structure and KVM_GET_CLOCK.
What are the results of the comparison.
And whether and backwards time was visible in the guest.
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:18:27AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 06.05.14 01:31, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:23:43PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
Hi Alexander,
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:51:22PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
When we migrate we ask the kernel about
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:54:35PM +0200, Marcin Gibuła wrote:
Yes, and it isn't. Any ideas why it's not? This patch really just uses
the guest visible kvmclock time rather than the host view of it on
migration.
There is definitely something very broken on the host's side since it
does
On 08.05.14 01:21, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 09:18:27AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 06.05.14 01:31, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:23:43PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
Hi Alexander,
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:51:22PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 06.05.14 01:27, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:26:04PM +0200, Marcin Gibuła wrote:
is it possible to have kvmclock jumping forward?
Because I've reproducible case when at about 1 per 20 vm restores, VM freezes
for couple of hours and then resumes with date few hundreds
On 06.05.14 01:23, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
Hi Alexander,
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:51:22PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
When we migrate we ask the kernel about its current belief on what the guest
time would be.
KVM_GET_CLOCK which returns the time in struct kvm_clock_data.
Yes :)
On 06.05.14 01:31, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:23:43PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
Hi Alexander,
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:51:22PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
When we migrate we ask the kernel about its current belief on what the guest
time would be.
KVM_GET_CLOCK
What is the host clocksource? (cat
/sys/devices/system/clocksource/clocksource0/current_clocksource).
tsc
And kernel version?
3.12.17
But I've seen this problem on earlier versions as well (3.8, 3.10).
--
mg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
the body of a
Yes, and it isn't. Any ideas why it's not? This patch really just uses
the guest visible kvmclock time rather than the host view of it on
migration.
There is definitely something very broken on the host's side since it
does return a smaller time than the guest exposed interface indicates.
When we migrate we ask the kernel about its current belief on what the guest
time would be. However, I've seen cases where the kvmclock guest structure
indicates a time more recent than the kvm returned time.
To make sure we never go backwards, calculate what the guest would have seen
as time at
W dniu 2014-05-05 15:51, Alexander Graf pisze:
When we migrate we ask the kernel about its current belief on what the guest
time would be. However, I've seen cases where the kvmclock guest structure
indicates a time more recent than the kvm returned time.
Hi,
is it possible to have kvmclock
Am 05.05.2014 um 19:46 schrieb Marcin Gibuła m.gib...@beyond.pl:
W dniu 2014-05-05 15:51, Alexander Graf pisze:
When we migrate we ask the kernel about its current belief on what the guest
time would be. However, I've seen cases where the kvmclock guest structure
indicates a time more
is it possible to have kvmclock jumping forward?
Because I've reproducible case when at about 1 per 20 vm restores, VM freezes
for couple of hours and then resumes with date few hundreds years ahead.
Happens only with kvmclock.
And this patch seems to fix very similar issue so maybe it's all
Hi Alexander,
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:51:22PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
When we migrate we ask the kernel about its current belief on what the guest
time would be.
KVM_GET_CLOCK which returns the time in struct kvm_clock_data.
However, I've seen cases where the kvmclock guest
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:26:04PM +0200, Marcin Gibuła wrote:
is it possible to have kvmclock jumping forward?
Because I've reproducible case when at about 1 per 20 vm restores, VM
freezes for couple of hours and then resumes with date few hundreds years
ahead. Happens only with kvmclock.
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:23:43PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
Hi Alexander,
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:51:22PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
When we migrate we ask the kernel about its current belief on what the guest
time would be.
KVM_GET_CLOCK which returns the time in struct
Marcin,
Can you provide detailed instructions on how to reproduce the problem?
Thanks
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:27:10PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 08:26:04PM +0200, Marcin Gibuła wrote:
is it possible to have kvmclock jumping forward?
Because I've
22 matches
Mail list logo
