From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Nov 30 10:53:04 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2487F6EA
 for <freebsd-xen@freebsd.org>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:53:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.tdx.com (mail.tdx.com [62.13.128.18])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8DDE18D0
 for <freebsd-xen@freebsd.org>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:53:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from study64.tdx.co.uk (study64.tdx.co.uk [62.13.130.231])
 (authenticated bits=0)
 by mail.tdx.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/) with ESMTP id rAUAqxCa025674
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
 Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:52:59 GMT
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:52:59 +0000
From: Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= <roger.pau@citrix.com>,
 freebsd-xen@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Xen Guests / NTP best practice?
Message-ID: <F3CD87E5453C039FABA1901C@study64.tdx.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <5298D244.3070905@citrix.com>
References: <960417385DD53D94B3E2DF1C@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk>
 <5298D244.3070905@citrix.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage
 <freebsd-xen.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-xen>,
 <mailto:freebsd-xen-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-xen/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-xen@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-xen-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen>,
 <mailto:freebsd-xen-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 10:53:04 -0000



--On 29 November 2013 18:43:32 +0100 Roger Pau Monn=C3=A9=20
<roger.pau@citrix.com> wrote:

> There have been some improvements in 10 regarding timekeeping, now
> FreeBSD makes use of the PV timer and PV clock when running under HVM,
> which should be more stable.
>
> Could you try if your issues with ntp are reproducible on 10?

Sure, I'll give 10 a go. Does the above mean for a VM you don't need to run =

ntp? (i.e. it'll stay in sync with dom0 / the XenServer?) - or is ntp still =

necessary?


Likewise do you know if there is any recommended solution for 9.x (which is =

the bulk of our VM's).

Thanks,

-Karl