Re: [PATCH] ptp: Add vDSO-style vmclock support
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: 2024-07-25 21:47:44
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-rtc, lkml, qemu-devel, virtualization
On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 10:29:18PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
Then can't we fix it by interrupting all CPUs right after LM? To me that seems like a cleaner approach - we then compartmentalize the ABI issue - kernel has its own ABI against userspace, devices have their own ABI against kernel. It'd mean we need a way to detect that interrupt was sent, maybe yet another counter inside that structure. WDYT? By the way the same idea would work for snapshots - some people wanted to expose that info to userspace, too.Those people included me. I wanted to interrupt all the vCPUs, even the ones which were in userspace at the moment of migration, and have the kernel deal with passing it on to userspace via a different ABI. It ends up being complex and intricate, and requiring a lot of new kernel and userspace support. I gave up on it in the end for snapshots, and didn't go there again for this.
ok I believe you, I am just curious how come you need userspace support - what I imagine would live completely in kernel ...
By contrast, a driver which merely exposes a page of MMIO space identified by an ACPI device (without even the in-kernel PTP support) could probably be fewer than a hundred lines of code. In an externally- buildable module that goes back as far as RHEL8 or even further, allowing users to just build and use it from their application.quoted
was there supposed to be text here, or did you just like this so much you decided to repost my mail ;)Hm, weirdness. I've known Evolution get into a state where it sends completely *empty* messages, but I've never seen it eat only my own part before. I had definitely typed responses (along the lines of the above) last time.
mutt sucks less ;)