Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 5 authors, 2021-08-18

Re: [v2 PATCH 4/4] x86/kvm: Add guest side support for virtual suspend time injection

From: Thomas Gleixner <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-10 15:48:12
Also in: lkml

On Fri, Aug 06 2021 at 19:07, Hikaru Nishida wrote:
 arch/x86/Kconfig                    | 13 ++++++++++
 arch/x86/include/asm/idtentry.h     |  4 +++
 arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_para.h     |  9 +++++++
 arch/x86/kernel/kvmclock.c          | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/timekeeper_internal.h |  4 +++
 kernel/time/timekeeping.c           | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
Again, this wants to be split into infrastructure and usage.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
--- a/include/linux/timekeeper_internal.h
+++ b/include/linux/timekeeper_internal.h
@@ -124,6 +124,10 @@ struct timekeeper {
	u32			ntp_err_mult;
	/* Flag used to avoid updating NTP twice with same second */
	u32			skip_second_overflow;
+#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_VIRT_SUSPEND_TIMING_GUEST
+	/* suspend_time_injected keeps the duration injected through kvm */
+	u64			suspend_time_injected;
This is KVM only, so please can we have a name for that struct member
which reflects this?
+#endif
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_TIMEKEEPING
	long			last_warning;
	/*
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
index 3ac3fb479981..424c61d38646 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
@@ -2125,6 +2125,39 @@ static u64 logarithmic_accumulation(struct timekeeper *tk, u64 offset,
 	return offset;
 }
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_VIRT_SUSPEND_TIMING_GUEST
+/*
+ * timekeeping_inject_virtual_suspend_time - Inject virtual suspend time
+ * when requested by the kvm host.
If this is an attempt to provide a kernel-doc comment for this function,
then it's clearly a failed attempt and aside of that malformatted.
+ * This function should be called under irq context.
Why? There is no reason for being called from interrupt context and
nothing inforces it.
+ */
+void timekeeping_inject_virtual_suspend_time(void)
+{
+	/*
+	 * Only updates shadow_timekeeper so the change will be reflected
+	 * on the next call of timekeeping_advance().
No. That's broken.

    timekeeping_inject_virtual_suspend_time();

    do_settimeofday() or do_adjtimex()

       timekeeping_update(tk, TK_MIRROR...);

and your change to the shadow timekeeper is gone.

Of course there is also no justification for this approach. What's wrong
with updating it right away?
+	 */
+	struct timekeeper *tk = &shadow_timekeeper;
+	unsigned long flags;
+	struct timespec64 delta;
+	u64 suspend_time;
Please sort variables in reverse fir tree order and not randomly as you
see fit.
+
+	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&timekeeper_lock, flags);
+	suspend_time = kvm_get_suspend_time();
+	if (suspend_time > tk->suspend_time_injected) {
+		/*
+		 * Do injection only if the time is not injected yet.
+		 * suspend_time and tk->suspend_time_injected values are
+		 * cummrative, so take a diff and inject the duration.
cummrative?
+		 */
+		delta = ns_to_timespec64(suspend_time - tk->suspend_time_injected);
+		__timekeeping_inject_sleeptime(tk, &delta);
+		tk->suspend_time_injected = suspend_time;
It's absolutely unclear how this storage and diff magic works and the
comment is not helping someone not familiar with the implementation of
kvm_get_suspend_time() and the related code at all. Please explain
non-obvious logic properly.

Thanks,

        tglx



Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help