Il 03/09/2014 20:25, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
snip
I'm not sure about the reason for the warp, but indeed the offset and
uptime match (I'll check them against the trace tomorrow) so it's just
that the VM's TSC base is not taken into account correctly.
Can you gather another trace with the
Il 04/09/2014 11:53, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
Il 03/09/2014 20:25, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
snip
I'm not sure about the reason for the warp, but indeed the offset and
uptime match (I'll check them against the trace tomorrow) so it's just
that the VM's TSC base is not taken into account
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:33:10PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 04/09/2014 11:53, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
Il 03/09/2014 20:25, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
snip
I'm not sure about the reason for the warp, but indeed the offset and
uptime match (I'll check them against the trace tomorrow) so
Il 04/09/2014 14:24, Wanpeng Li ha scritto:
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 01:33:10PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 04/09/2014 11:53, Paolo Bonzini ha scritto:
Il 03/09/2014 20:25, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
snip
I'm not sure about the reason for the warp, but indeed the offset and
uptime match
Il 02/09/2014 21:57, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
Can you please trace the test using trace-cmd
(http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tracing) and send the output?
Paolo
Paolo,
I have posted the trace data here:
http://people.canonical.com/~arges/kvm/trace.dat.xz
Can you try running the
Il 02/09/2014 21:57, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
Seconds get from host: 1409687073
Seconds get from kvmclock: 1409333034
Offset:-354039
offset too large!
Check the stability of raw cycle ...
Worst warp -354462672821748
Total vcpus: 2
Test loops: 1000
Total
On 09/03/2014 09:47 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 02/09/2014 21:57, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
Can you please trace the test using trace-cmd
(http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tracing) and send the output?
Paolo
Paolo,
I have posted the trace data here:
On 09/03/2014 09:59 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 02/09/2014 21:57, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
Seconds get from host: 1409687073
Seconds get from kvmclock: 1409333034
Offset:-354039
offset too large!
Check the stability of raw cycle ...
Worst warp -354462672821748
Il 03/09/2014 18:23, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
$ uptime
16:18:31 up 53 min, 1 user, load average: 1.16, 0.39, 0.17
$ grep -m1 model.name /proc/cpuinfo
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2697 v3 @ 2.60GHz
Here is the output of the command:
qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -device
snip
I'm not sure about the reason for the warp, but indeed the offset and
uptime match (I'll check them against the trace tomorrow) so it's just
that the VM's TSC base is not taken into account correctly.
Can you gather another trace with the problematic patch reverted?
Paolo
Here is
On 08/31/2014 11:05 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 29/08/2014 23:05, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
And indeed there is a condition where matched already_matched are
both true. In this case we don't zero or increment nr_vcpus_matched_tsc.
Incrementing nr_vcpus_matched_tsc in that last else clause
Il 29/08/2014 23:05, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
And indeed there is a condition where matched already_matched are
both true. In this case we don't zero or increment nr_vcpus_matched_tsc.
Incrementing nr_vcpus_matched_tsc in that last else clause allows the
test to pass; however this is
On 08/27/2014 05:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
- Messaggio originale -
Da: Chris J Arges chris.j.ar...@canonical.com
A: Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Inviato: Mercoledì, 27 agosto 2014 23:24:14
Oggetto: kvm-unit-test failures (was: [PATCH 1/2 v3] add check
On 08/29/2014 12:36 PM, Chris J Arges wrote:
On 08/27/2014 05:05 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
- Messaggio originale -
Da: Chris J Arges chris.j.ar...@canonical.com
A: Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Inviato: Mercoledì, 27 agosto 2014 23:24:14
Oggetto: kvm-unit
Il 29/08/2014 19:36, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
I still get failures with the following test, I actually tested on
multiple machines with identical hardware and the same failure occurred.
In v3.13/v3.16 series kernels this passes. I'll look into which commit
changed this result for me. I
On 08/29/2014 04:08 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 29/08/2014 19:36, Chris J Arges ha scritto:
I still get failures with the following test, I actually tested on
multiple machines with identical hardware and the same failure occurred.
In v3.13/v3.16 series kernels this passes. I'll look into
snip
Thanks, looks good. Are there more failures?
Paolo
Paolo,
Thanks for applying those patches!
I now only see the two failures on my machine:
model name : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2697 v3 @ 2.60GHz
I'm running with the tip of kvm master:
0ac625df43ce9d085d4ff54c1f739611f4308b13
- Messaggio originale -
Da: Chris J Arges chris.j.ar...@canonical.com
A: Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Inviato: Mercoledì, 27 agosto 2014 23:24:14
Oggetto: kvm-unit-test failures (was: [PATCH 1/2 v3] add check parameter to
run_tests configuration)
snip
18 matches
Mail list logo
