[RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64
maz at kernel.org
Mon Jan 13 03:21:11 PST 2020
On 2020-01-13 10:37, Jianyong Wu wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Marc Zyngier <maz at kernel.org>
>> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2020 6:35 PM
>> To: Jianyong Wu <Jianyong.Wu at arm.com>
>> Cc: netdev at vger.kernel.org; yangbo.lu at nxp.com; john.stultz at linaro.org;
>> tglx at linutronix.de; pbonzini at redhat.com;
>> sean.j.christopherson at intel.com;
>> richardcochran at gmail.com; Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland at arm.com>;
>> will at kernel.org; Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose at arm.com>; Steven Price
>> <Steven.Price at arm.com>; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
>> kernel at lists.infradead.org; kvmarm at lists.cs.columbia.edu;
>> kvm at vger.kernel.org; Steve Capper <Steve.Capper at arm.com>; Kaly Xin
>> <Kaly.Xin at arm.com>; Justin He <Justin.He at arm.com>; nd <nd at arm.com>
>> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 7/8] ptp: arm64: Enable ptp_kvm for arm64
>> Hi Jianyong,
>> On 2020-01-10 10:15, Jianyong Wu wrote:
>> > Hi Marc,
>> >> >> > + 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.
>> > Sorry, I will avoid to use those strong words.
>> > It's really the case that the hypercall won't across cycle in general.
>> > But sometimes, kernel preempt
>> > may happen in the middle of the hypercall which we can't assume how
>> > long before schedule back. so it's better capture them together at the
>> > same time.
>> Fair enough. Please document the rational, as I guess others will ask
>> same questions.
>> Then the problem to solve is that of the reference counter, as you so
>> assume the virtual counter. I guess you need to be able to let the
>> select the reference counter when calling the PTP service.
> I could not come up with an idea about the point where the guest give
> this info of counter value.
> Where we give that interface to ptp service, as it's not a user space
Again: why don't you let the guest ask for the counter it wants as part
of the SMC call? What is preventing this?
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
More information about the linux-arm-kernel