>>> On 09.09.15 at 10:31, <ko...@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> writes: > >>>>> On 09.09.15 at 09:31, <ko...@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: >>> The ACPI PM timer is sometimes broken on live migration. >>> Since vcpu->arch.hvm_vcpu.guest_time is zero in most cases. >> >> I.e. in other than "delay for missed ticks mode". Would have been >> nice if you had spelled this out explicitly. > > Actually, I tried "delay for missed ticks mode" (timer_mode=0). > Even in this case, the pmtimer was broken. I don't know why.
It would of course be helpful to understand why. >> With that the question then is - >> should the field perhaps be used when non-zero, and the >> function only be called otherwise? > > The adjustment of timer value in pmtimer_save() was introduced > before other timer_modes were implemented. > > I'm not sure (skeptical) the small adjustment is really necessary > in pmtimer_save. Together with the above, and with or without code adjustment, I'd then like to ask for a v2 with an improved description. And please don't forget to Cc maintainers of the code as well as Wei (the 4.6 release manager). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
