From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1990C32771 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B9BA2073A for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1578561865; bh=rE6HvUtSt3u7eFMLFuQdxwt/rQxpTj8qvddqpd/Tfmw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:List-ID:From; b=jAtKucVWQrMGoR6ey9OydBXbDZLJUJicFH45Y9pQABz9mjVZEmLpY68y0AokIw/WQ NT/gZ04hk+Ytp3LC7sYnpmdwMiwUR4v9hClGmfVyZ7asQyvEdWQw+vh4pNSKLeiw/W pP/GI3lBcLe3mTTbKsG7ipBd1dzNW9HNszrdBroQ= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729580AbgAIJYY (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jan 2020 04:24:24 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:52538 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729269AbgAIJYX (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Jan 2020 04:24:23 -0500 Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D035C2067D; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1578561863; bh=rE6HvUtSt3u7eFMLFuQdxwt/rQxpTj8qvddqpd/Tfmw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=CQUWhqf3v3AKgd0rgE/z8fLOzbtHFnOVWJGwlYTCD9ZRkW+K7ncBJQ1X5x2G6uiAp xhFIvBoEYSnJp+lkiRdhL3iEgUS/ai40djaz+mpKwy2Q8xR2PnNvFb1Wa0X58CawEa nHNKNJKJ3ianXNJ4RY1AWarcH6YATfN7OMHmZtvY= Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org ([51.254.78.96] helo=www.loen.fr) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ipU3B-0002RW-3a; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:24:21 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:24:20 +0000 From: Marc Zyngier To: Jianyong Wu Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, yangbo.lu@nxp.com, john.stultz@linaro.org, tglx@linutronix.de, pbonzini@redhat.com, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, richardcochran@gmail.com, Mark Rutland , will@kernel.org, Suzuki Poulose , Steven Price , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Steve Capper , Kaly Xin , Justin He , nd Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64 In-Reply-To: References: <20191210034026.45229-1-jianyong.wu@arm.com> <20191210034026.45229-8-jianyong.wu@arm.com> Message-ID: X-Sender: maz@kernel.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.8 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 51.254.78.96 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: Jianyong.Wu@arm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, yangbo.lu@nxp.com, john.stultz@linaro.org, tglx@linutronix.de, pbonzini@redhat.com, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, richardcochran@gmail.com, Mark.Rutland@arm.com, will@kernel.org, Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com, Steven.Price@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Steve.Capper@arm.com, Kaly.Xin@arm.com, Justin.He@arm.com, nd@arm.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2020-01-09 05:59, Jianyong Wu wrote: > Hi Marc, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Marc Zyngier >> Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 5:29 PM >> To: Jianyong Wu >> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; yangbo.lu@nxp.com; john.stultz@linaro.org; >> tglx@linutronix.de; pbonzini@redhat.com; >> sean.j.christopherson@intel.com; >> richardcochran@gmail.com; Mark Rutland ; >> will@kernel.org; Suzuki Poulose ; Steven Price >> ; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- >> kernel@lists.infradead.org; kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu; >> kvm@vger.kernel.org; Steve Capper ; Kaly Xin >> ; Justin He ; nd >> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64 >> >> On 2019-12-10 03:40, Jianyong Wu wrote: >> > Currently in arm64 virtualization environment, there is no mechanism >> > to keep time sync between guest and host. Time in guest will drift >> > compared with host after boot up as they may both use third party time >> > sources to correct their time respectively. The time deviation will be >> > in order of milliseconds but some scenarios ask for higher time >> > precision, like in cloud envirenment, we want all the VMs running in >> > the host aquire the same level accuracy from host clock. >> > >> > Use of kvm ptp clock, which choose the host clock source clock as a >> > reference clock to sync time clock between guest and host has been >> > adopted by x86 which makes the time sync order from milliseconds to >> > nanoseconds. >> > >> > This patch enable kvm ptp on arm64 and we get the similar clock drift >> > as found with x86 with kvm ptp. >> > >> > Test result comparison between with kvm ptp and without it in arm64 >> > are as follows. This test derived from the result of command 'chronyc >> > sources'. we should take more cure of the last sample column which >> > shows the offset between the local clock and the source at the last >> > measurement. >> > >> > no kvm ptp in guest: >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 13 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 21 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 29 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 37 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 45 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 53 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 61 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 4 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 12 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 20 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > >> > in host: >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 72 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 92 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 112 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 2 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 22 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 43 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 63 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 83 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 103 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 123 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > >> > The dns1.synet.edu.cn is the network reference clock for guest and >> > 120.25.115.20 is the network reference clock for host. we can't get >> > the clock error between guest and host directly, but a roughly >> > estimated value will be in order of hundreds of us to ms. >> > >> > with kvm ptp in guest: >> > chrony has been disabled in host to remove the disturb by network >> > clock. >> > >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 -7ns[ +1ns] +/- >> > 3ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 +1ns[ +16ns] +/- >> > 3ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 6 -4ns[ -0ns] +/- >> > 6ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 6 -8ns[ -12ns] +/- >> > 5ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 5 +2ns[ +4ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 13 +2ns[ +4ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 12 -4ns[ -6ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 11 -8ns[ -11ns] +/- >> > 6ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 10 -14ns[ -20ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 +4ns[ +5ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > >> > The PHC0 is the ptp clock which choose the host clock as its source >> > clock. So we can be sure to say that the clock error between host and >> > guest is in order of ns. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Jianyong Wu >> > --- >> > drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 22 ++++++++++++ >> > drivers/ptp/Kconfig | 2 +- >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c | 53 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > 3 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > index 277846decd33..72260b66f02e 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > @@ -1636,3 +1636,25 @@ static int __init arch_timer_acpi_init(struct >> > acpi_table_header *table) } TIMER_ACPI_DECLARE(arch_timer, >> > ACPI_SIG_GTDT, arch_timer_acpi_init); #endif >> > + >> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM) >> > +#include >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp(unsigned long *cycle, struct >> > timespec64 *ts, >> > + struct clocksource **cs) >> > +{ >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + ktime_t ktime_overall; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, &hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res.a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + ktime_overall = hvc_res.a0 << 32 | hvc_res.a1; >> > + *ts = ktime_to_timespec64(ktime_overall); >> > + *cycle = hvc_res.a2 << 32 | hvc_res.a3; >> >> So why isn't that just a read of the virtual counter, given that what >> you do in >> the hypervisor seems to be "cntpct - cntvoff"? >> >> What am I missing here? >> > We need get clock time and counter cycle at the same time, so we can't > just read virtual counter > at guest and must get it from host. See my comment in my reply to patch #6: *Must* seems like a very strong word, and you don't explain *why* that's better than just computing the total hypercall cost. Hint: given the frequency of the counter (in the few MHz range) vs the frequency of a CPU (in the multiple GHz range, and with an IPC close enough to 1), I doubt that you'll see the counter making much progress across a hypercall. > >> > + *cs = &clocksource_counter; >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp); >> > +#endif >> > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig index >> > 9b8fee5178e8..3c31ff8eb05f 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig >> > +++ b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig >> > @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH config >> > PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM >> > tristate "KVM virtual PTP clock" >> > depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK >> > - depends on KVM_GUEST && X86 >> > + depends on KVM_GUEST && X86 || ARM64 && ARM_ARCH_TIMER >> > default y >> > help >> > This driver adds support for using kvm infrastructure as a PTP >> > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c b/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..f3f957117865 >> > --- /dev/null >> > +++ b/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ >> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only >> > +/* >> > + * Virtual PTP 1588 clock for use with KVM guests >> > + * Copyright (C) 2019 ARM Ltd. >> > + * All Rights Reserved >> > + */ >> > + >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_init(void) >> > +{ >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, >> > + &hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res.a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock_generic(struct timespec64 *ts, >> > + struct arm_smccc_res *hvc_res) { >> > + ktime_t ktime_overall; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, >> > + hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res->a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + ktime_overall = hvc_res->a0 << 32 | hvc_res->a1; >> > + *ts = ktime_to_timespec64(ktime_overall); >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock(struct timespec64 *ts) { >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + >> > + kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock_generic(ts, &hvc_res); >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> >> I also wonder why this is all arm64 specific, while everything should >> also work >> just fine on 32bit. >> > ptp_kvm is a feature for cloud computing to keep time consistency from > container to container and to host on server, Cloud computing? Never heard of that. Will probably never catch on. > So we focus it on arm64. Also I have never tested it on arm32 machine > ( we lack of arm32 machine) I'm sure your employer can provide you with such a box. I can probably even tell you which cupboard they are stored in... ;-) > Do you think it's necessary to enable ptp_kvm on arm32? If so, I can do > that. I can't see why we wouldn't, given that it should be a zero effort task (none of the code here is arch specific). Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F2C4C33CA4 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D71CC2073A for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="CQUWhqf3" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D71CC2073A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72A0E4B171; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 04:24:28 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Authentication-Results: mm01.cs.columbia.edu (amavisd-new); dkim=softfail (fail, message has been altered) header.i=@kernel.org Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xbqrGDTlvdGF; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 04:24:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B57DE4B1DD; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 04:24:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFCDE4B1DD for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 04:24:25 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZP-LCApmDqhB for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 04:24:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F8E34B171 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 04:24:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D035C2067D; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1578561863; bh=rE6HvUtSt3u7eFMLFuQdxwt/rQxpTj8qvddqpd/Tfmw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=CQUWhqf3v3AKgd0rgE/z8fLOzbtHFnOVWJGwlYTCD9ZRkW+K7ncBJQ1X5x2G6uiAp xhFIvBoEYSnJp+lkiRdhL3iEgUS/ai40djaz+mpKwy2Q8xR2PnNvFb1Wa0X58CawEa nHNKNJKJ3ianXNJ4RY1AWarcH6YATfN7OMHmZtvY= Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org ([51.254.78.96] helo=www.loen.fr) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ipU3B-0002RW-3a; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:24:21 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:24:20 +0000 From: Marc Zyngier To: Jianyong Wu Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64 In-Reply-To: References: <20191210034026.45229-1-jianyong.wu@arm.com> <20191210034026.45229-8-jianyong.wu@arm.com> Message-ID: X-Sender: maz@kernel.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.8 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 51.254.78.96 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: Jianyong.Wu@arm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, yangbo.lu@nxp.com, john.stultz@linaro.org, tglx@linutronix.de, pbonzini@redhat.com, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, richardcochran@gmail.com, Mark.Rutland@arm.com, will@kernel.org, Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com, Steven.Price@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Steve.Capper@arm.com, Kaly.Xin@arm.com, Justin.He@arm.com, nd@arm.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: Justin He , kvm@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, richardcochran@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, Steven Price , john.stultz@linaro.org, yangbo.lu@nxp.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, nd , will@kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu On 2020-01-09 05:59, Jianyong Wu wrote: > Hi Marc, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Marc Zyngier >> Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 5:29 PM >> To: Jianyong Wu >> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; yangbo.lu@nxp.com; john.stultz@linaro.org; >> tglx@linutronix.de; pbonzini@redhat.com; >> sean.j.christopherson@intel.com; >> richardcochran@gmail.com; Mark Rutland ; >> will@kernel.org; Suzuki Poulose ; Steven Price >> ; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- >> kernel@lists.infradead.org; kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu; >> kvm@vger.kernel.org; Steve Capper ; Kaly Xin >> ; Justin He ; nd >> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64 >> >> On 2019-12-10 03:40, Jianyong Wu wrote: >> > Currently in arm64 virtualization environment, there is no mechanism >> > to keep time sync between guest and host. Time in guest will drift >> > compared with host after boot up as they may both use third party time >> > sources to correct their time respectively. The time deviation will be >> > in order of milliseconds but some scenarios ask for higher time >> > precision, like in cloud envirenment, we want all the VMs running in >> > the host aquire the same level accuracy from host clock. >> > >> > Use of kvm ptp clock, which choose the host clock source clock as a >> > reference clock to sync time clock between guest and host has been >> > adopted by x86 which makes the time sync order from milliseconds to >> > nanoseconds. >> > >> > This patch enable kvm ptp on arm64 and we get the similar clock drift >> > as found with x86 with kvm ptp. >> > >> > Test result comparison between with kvm ptp and without it in arm64 >> > are as follows. This test derived from the result of command 'chronyc >> > sources'. we should take more cure of the last sample column which >> > shows the offset between the local clock and the source at the last >> > measurement. >> > >> > no kvm ptp in guest: >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 13 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 21 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 29 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 37 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 45 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 53 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 61 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 4 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 12 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 20 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > >> > in host: >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 72 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 92 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 112 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 2 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 22 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 43 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 63 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 83 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 103 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 123 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > >> > The dns1.synet.edu.cn is the network reference clock for guest and >> > 120.25.115.20 is the network reference clock for host. we can't get >> > the clock error between guest and host directly, but a roughly >> > estimated value will be in order of hundreds of us to ms. >> > >> > with kvm ptp in guest: >> > chrony has been disabled in host to remove the disturb by network >> > clock. >> > >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 -7ns[ +1ns] +/- >> > 3ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 +1ns[ +16ns] +/- >> > 3ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 6 -4ns[ -0ns] +/- >> > 6ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 6 -8ns[ -12ns] +/- >> > 5ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 5 +2ns[ +4ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 13 +2ns[ +4ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 12 -4ns[ -6ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 11 -8ns[ -11ns] +/- >> > 6ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 10 -14ns[ -20ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 +4ns[ +5ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > >> > The PHC0 is the ptp clock which choose the host clock as its source >> > clock. So we can be sure to say that the clock error between host and >> > guest is in order of ns. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Jianyong Wu >> > --- >> > drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 22 ++++++++++++ >> > drivers/ptp/Kconfig | 2 +- >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c | 53 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > 3 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > index 277846decd33..72260b66f02e 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > @@ -1636,3 +1636,25 @@ static int __init arch_timer_acpi_init(struct >> > acpi_table_header *table) } TIMER_ACPI_DECLARE(arch_timer, >> > ACPI_SIG_GTDT, arch_timer_acpi_init); #endif >> > + >> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM) >> > +#include >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp(unsigned long *cycle, struct >> > timespec64 *ts, >> > + struct clocksource **cs) >> > +{ >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + ktime_t ktime_overall; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, &hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res.a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + ktime_overall = hvc_res.a0 << 32 | hvc_res.a1; >> > + *ts = ktime_to_timespec64(ktime_overall); >> > + *cycle = hvc_res.a2 << 32 | hvc_res.a3; >> >> So why isn't that just a read of the virtual counter, given that what >> you do in >> the hypervisor seems to be "cntpct - cntvoff"? >> >> What am I missing here? >> > We need get clock time and counter cycle at the same time, so we can't > just read virtual counter > at guest and must get it from host. See my comment in my reply to patch #6: *Must* seems like a very strong word, and you don't explain *why* that's better than just computing the total hypercall cost. Hint: given the frequency of the counter (in the few MHz range) vs the frequency of a CPU (in the multiple GHz range, and with an IPC close enough to 1), I doubt that you'll see the counter making much progress across a hypercall. > >> > + *cs = &clocksource_counter; >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp); >> > +#endif >> > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig index >> > 9b8fee5178e8..3c31ff8eb05f 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig >> > +++ b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig >> > @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH config >> > PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM >> > tristate "KVM virtual PTP clock" >> > depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK >> > - depends on KVM_GUEST && X86 >> > + depends on KVM_GUEST && X86 || ARM64 && ARM_ARCH_TIMER >> > default y >> > help >> > This driver adds support for using kvm infrastructure as a PTP >> > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c b/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..f3f957117865 >> > --- /dev/null >> > +++ b/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ >> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only >> > +/* >> > + * Virtual PTP 1588 clock for use with KVM guests >> > + * Copyright (C) 2019 ARM Ltd. >> > + * All Rights Reserved >> > + */ >> > + >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_init(void) >> > +{ >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, >> > + &hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res.a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock_generic(struct timespec64 *ts, >> > + struct arm_smccc_res *hvc_res) { >> > + ktime_t ktime_overall; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, >> > + hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res->a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + ktime_overall = hvc_res->a0 << 32 | hvc_res->a1; >> > + *ts = ktime_to_timespec64(ktime_overall); >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock(struct timespec64 *ts) { >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + >> > + kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock_generic(ts, &hvc_res); >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> >> I also wonder why this is all arm64 specific, while everything should >> also work >> just fine on 32bit. >> > ptp_kvm is a feature for cloud computing to keep time consistency from > container to container and to host on server, Cloud computing? Never heard of that. Will probably never catch on. > So we focus it on arm64. Also I have never tested it on arm32 machine > ( we lack of arm32 machine) I'm sure your employer can provide you with such a box. I can probably even tell you which cupboard they are stored in... ;-) > Do you think it's necessary to enable ptp_kvm on arm32? If so, I can do > that. I can't see why we wouldn't, given that it should be a zero effort task (none of the code here is arch specific). Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06491C32771 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C65CC2067D for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="ioGR8xAS"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="CQUWhqf3" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C65CC2067D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To:From: Date:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=94WOy9s4enWZbKCPb9sBl+qOWDB08hmL5FHlKU3sKcg=; b=ioGR8xAS+auFsBsdIW9IXS0WL +LeN8ISQLYcO+szORvGGVGlAbLUvinbvCYres+NbjsQoVq0WRbOvpymamURcwqBoR0ymRmmOzzbkX LE1pgHDZA5IH13e7YD/9chfZqdP7KnnIu4IkYcmYP0srhHZsiQTiCl+O+9Qju/Ap68lkgRAY64Kn8 7+Qye/hAQg21/RR0KKADOP31/on3s/B8p/1enPoP4louI7KpRj+YGKbAbYFpCRYwiRJ8zZP/BCtkT R5rwxqjM/qvqs94YGK82/9brOb3GaH7uQ9tbaog4u1v1mGxr8OtzqkRxwE2XNtFxXYK1Uoa1NLlNn LElONmzdw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ipU3H-0007f6-4W; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:24:27 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ipU3D-0007dw-8o for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:24:25 +0000 Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D035C2067D; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:24:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1578561863; bh=rE6HvUtSt3u7eFMLFuQdxwt/rQxpTj8qvddqpd/Tfmw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=CQUWhqf3v3AKgd0rgE/z8fLOzbtHFnOVWJGwlYTCD9ZRkW+K7ncBJQ1X5x2G6uiAp xhFIvBoEYSnJp+lkiRdhL3iEgUS/ai40djaz+mpKwy2Q8xR2PnNvFb1Wa0X58CawEa nHNKNJKJ3ianXNJ4RY1AWarcH6YATfN7OMHmZtvY= Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org ([51.254.78.96] helo=www.loen.fr) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ipU3B-0002RW-3a; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:24:21 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:24:20 +0000 From: Marc Zyngier To: Jianyong Wu Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64 In-Reply-To: References: <20191210034026.45229-1-jianyong.wu@arm.com> <20191210034026.45229-8-jianyong.wu@arm.com> Message-ID: X-Sender: maz@kernel.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.8 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 51.254.78.96 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: Jianyong.Wu@arm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, yangbo.lu@nxp.com, john.stultz@linaro.org, tglx@linutronix.de, pbonzini@redhat.com, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, richardcochran@gmail.com, Mark.Rutland@arm.com, will@kernel.org, Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com, Steven.Price@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Steve.Capper@arm.com, Kaly.Xin@arm.com, Justin.He@arm.com, nd@arm.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200109_012423_350334_6F7AE8D5 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 31.04 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Justin He , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Suzuki Poulose , netdev@vger.kernel.org, richardcochran@gmail.com, Steve Capper , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, Steven Price , Kaly Xin , john.stultz@linaro.org, yangbo.lu@nxp.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, nd , will@kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 2020-01-09 05:59, Jianyong Wu wrote: > Hi Marc, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Marc Zyngier >> Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 5:29 PM >> To: Jianyong Wu >> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; yangbo.lu@nxp.com; john.stultz@linaro.org; >> tglx@linutronix.de; pbonzini@redhat.com; >> sean.j.christopherson@intel.com; >> richardcochran@gmail.com; Mark Rutland ; >> will@kernel.org; Suzuki Poulose ; Steven Price >> ; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- >> kernel@lists.infradead.org; kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu; >> kvm@vger.kernel.org; Steve Capper ; Kaly Xin >> ; Justin He ; nd >> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64 >> >> On 2019-12-10 03:40, Jianyong Wu wrote: >> > Currently in arm64 virtualization environment, there is no mechanism >> > to keep time sync between guest and host. Time in guest will drift >> > compared with host after boot up as they may both use third party time >> > sources to correct their time respectively. The time deviation will be >> > in order of milliseconds but some scenarios ask for higher time >> > precision, like in cloud envirenment, we want all the VMs running in >> > the host aquire the same level accuracy from host clock. >> > >> > Use of kvm ptp clock, which choose the host clock source clock as a >> > reference clock to sync time clock between guest and host has been >> > adopted by x86 which makes the time sync order from milliseconds to >> > nanoseconds. >> > >> > This patch enable kvm ptp on arm64 and we get the similar clock drift >> > as found with x86 with kvm ptp. >> > >> > Test result comparison between with kvm ptp and without it in arm64 >> > are as follows. This test derived from the result of command 'chronyc >> > sources'. we should take more cure of the last sample column which >> > shows the offset between the local clock and the source at the last >> > measurement. >> > >> > no kvm ptp in guest: >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 13 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 21 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 29 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 37 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 45 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 53 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 61 +1040us[+1581us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 4 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 12 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > ^* dns1.synet.edu.cn 2 6 377 20 -130us[ +796us] +/- >> > 21ms >> > >> > in host: >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 72 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 92 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 112 -470us[ -603us] +/- >> > 18ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 2 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 22 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 43 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 63 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 83 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 103 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > ^* 120.25.115.20 2 7 377 123 +872ns[-6808ns] +/- >> > 17ms >> > >> > The dns1.synet.edu.cn is the network reference clock for guest and >> > 120.25.115.20 is the network reference clock for host. we can't get >> > the clock error between guest and host directly, but a roughly >> > estimated value will be in order of hundreds of us to ms. >> > >> > with kvm ptp in guest: >> > chrony has been disabled in host to remove the disturb by network >> > clock. >> > >> > MS Name/IP address Stratum Poll Reach LastRx Last sample >> > >> ========================================================== >> ============== >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 -7ns[ +1ns] +/- >> > 3ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 +1ns[ +16ns] +/- >> > 3ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 6 -4ns[ -0ns] +/- >> > 6ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 6 -8ns[ -12ns] +/- >> > 5ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 5 +2ns[ +4ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 13 +2ns[ +4ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 12 -4ns[ -6ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 11 -8ns[ -11ns] +/- >> > 6ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 10 -14ns[ -20ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > * PHC0 0 3 377 8 +4ns[ +5ns] +/- >> > 4ns >> > >> > The PHC0 is the ptp clock which choose the host clock as its source >> > clock. So we can be sure to say that the clock error between host and >> > guest is in order of ns. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Jianyong Wu >> > --- >> > drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 22 ++++++++++++ >> > drivers/ptp/Kconfig | 2 +- >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c | 53 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> > 3 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 >> > drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > index 277846decd33..72260b66f02e 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c >> > @@ -1636,3 +1636,25 @@ static int __init arch_timer_acpi_init(struct >> > acpi_table_header *table) } TIMER_ACPI_DECLARE(arch_timer, >> > ACPI_SIG_GTDT, arch_timer_acpi_init); #endif >> > + >> > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM) >> > +#include >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp(unsigned long *cycle, struct >> > timespec64 *ts, >> > + struct clocksource **cs) >> > +{ >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + ktime_t ktime_overall; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, &hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res.a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + ktime_overall = hvc_res.a0 << 32 | hvc_res.a1; >> > + *ts = ktime_to_timespec64(ktime_overall); >> > + *cycle = hvc_res.a2 << 32 | hvc_res.a3; >> >> So why isn't that just a read of the virtual counter, given that what >> you do in >> the hypervisor seems to be "cntpct - cntvoff"? >> >> What am I missing here? >> > We need get clock time and counter cycle at the same time, so we can't > just read virtual counter > at guest and must get it from host. See my comment in my reply to patch #6: *Must* seems like a very strong word, and you don't explain *why* that's better than just computing the total hypercall cost. Hint: given the frequency of the counter (in the few MHz range) vs the frequency of a CPU (in the multiple GHz range, and with an IPC close enough to 1), I doubt that you'll see the counter making much progress across a hypercall. > >> > + *cs = &clocksource_counter; >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_arch_ptp_get_crosststamp); >> > +#endif >> > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig index >> > 9b8fee5178e8..3c31ff8eb05f 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/ptp/Kconfig >> > +++ b/drivers/ptp/Kconfig >> > @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ config PTP_1588_CLOCK_PCH config >> > PTP_1588_CLOCK_KVM >> > tristate "KVM virtual PTP clock" >> > depends on PTP_1588_CLOCK >> > - depends on KVM_GUEST && X86 >> > + depends on KVM_GUEST && X86 || ARM64 && ARM_ARCH_TIMER >> > default y >> > help >> > This driver adds support for using kvm infrastructure as a PTP >> > diff --git a/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c b/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..f3f957117865 >> > --- /dev/null >> > +++ b/drivers/ptp/ptp_kvm_arm64.c >> > @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ >> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only >> > +/* >> > + * Virtual PTP 1588 clock for use with KVM guests >> > + * Copyright (C) 2019 ARM Ltd. >> > + * All Rights Reserved >> > + */ >> > + >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > +#include >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_init(void) >> > +{ >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, >> > + &hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res.a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock_generic(struct timespec64 *ts, >> > + struct arm_smccc_res *hvc_res) { >> > + ktime_t ktime_overall; >> > + >> > + >> arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_VENDOR_HYP_KVM_PTP_FU >> NC_ID, >> > + hvc_res); >> > + if ((long)(hvc_res->a0) < 0) >> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> > + >> > + ktime_overall = hvc_res->a0 << 32 | hvc_res->a1; >> > + *ts = ktime_to_timespec64(ktime_overall); >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> > + >> > +int kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock(struct timespec64 *ts) { >> > + struct arm_smccc_res hvc_res; >> > + >> > + kvm_arch_ptp_get_clock_generic(ts, &hvc_res); >> > + >> > + return 0; >> > +} >> >> I also wonder why this is all arm64 specific, while everything should >> also work >> just fine on 32bit. >> > ptp_kvm is a feature for cloud computing to keep time consistency from > container to container and to host on server, Cloud computing? Never heard of that. Will probably never catch on. > So we focus it on arm64. Also I have never tested it on arm32 machine > ( we lack of arm32 machine) I'm sure your employer can provide you with such a box. I can probably even tell you which cupboard they are stored in... ;-) > Do you think it's necessary to enable ptp_kvm on arm32? If so, I can do > that. I can't see why we wouldn't, given that it should be a zero effort task (none of the code here is arch specific). Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel