Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 18 Jul 2010 17:22:27 +0300 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: KVM timekeeping fixes, V2 |
| |
On 07/16/2010 10:26 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 07:20:32AM -1000, Zachary Amsden wrote: > > >> I've been very careful to keep nested SVM safe, but I've not got a good >> test for that. Is there any test suite for the nested case? >> > To test this you can boot a nested Linux guest and let both, L1 and L2 > guest use kvm_clock. Then put some load into the L2 guest and see if the > L2 or the L1 freezes hard (which happens with kvm_clock when the TSC > went backwards for one of them). > >
With recent guests, they won't freeze any more, since we detect the tsc going backwards and compensate (in a brute-force way, nothing clever).
But you can printk the maximum compensation and see if it's something unreasonable.
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
| |