> Would it be OK to call

> > update_domain_wallclock_time unconditionally on
> > hvm_hypercall_page_initialise?
>
> The primary question is - why is what we have not enough for you?
> In particular I would expect that the call from arch_set_info_guest()
> (for vCPU 0) should do what you want. Or wait, this is covering PV
> only. So yes, with the description change I would then withdraw my
> NACK - apparently no-one really used the shared info wall clock
> time in a HVM guest so far (or it going wrong post-resume wasn't
> noticed).
>

It was. Olaf posted a patch that would re-init the shared page for PVHVM
guest
(for kexec to work) and it stopped migration on 32-bit guest doing
migration.

Olaf and me never got enough time to actually dig in this to figure out why
it was
busted :-(