From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: Runaway real/sys time in newer paravirt domUs? Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:00:13 +0100 Message-ID: <4C3763AD020000780000A8B1@vpn.id2.novell.com> References: <4C337E5D.7040407@goop.org> <053B0147-FC71-4440-896E-1A37E6A4CEEA@linode.com> <4C36FDED020000780000A6AA@vpn.id2.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jed Smith Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 09.07.10 at 16:57, Jed Smith wrote: > On Jul 9, 2010, at 4:46 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >> Is this perhaps also dependent on the CPU make/model? > - Between 2.6.29 and 2.6.30, /proc/uptime behaves much differently, and = the=20 > bug > then exposes itself. Something changed there. Others as well as me had seen similar misbehavior (outside of pv-ops), but only on reasonably new Intel systems. sched_clock_stable getting set to one in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c turned out to be the problem. Jan