From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Oct 20 15:12:15 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88EB8E383B7 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2017 15:12:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) Received: from outbound1b.ore.mailhop.org (outbound1b.ore.mailhop.org [54.200.247.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C8C47EAF2 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2017 15:12:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) X-MHO-User: 13fd320e-b5a9-11e7-a938-4f970e858fdb X-Report-Abuse-To: https://support.duocircle.com/support/solutions/articles/5000540958-duocircle-standard-smtp-abuse-information X-Originating-IP: 73.78.92.27 X-Mail-Handler: DuoCircle Outbound SMTP Received: from ilsoft.org (unknown [73.78.92.27]) by outbound1.ore.mailhop.org (Halon) with ESMTPSA id 13fd320e-b5a9-11e7-a938-4f970e858fdb; Fri, 20 Oct 2017 15:12:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rev (rev [172.22.42.240]) by ilsoft.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v9KFC7bl011269; Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:12:07 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <1508512327.1383.55.camel@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: host, bhyve vm and ntpd From: Ian Lepore To: Boris Samorodov , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:12:07 -0600 In-Reply-To: <2931f1cc-6574-b58d-4b94-5f77fa5cdb85@passap.ru> References: <2931f1cc-6574-b58d-4b94-5f77fa5cdb85@passap.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 15:12:15 -0000 On Fri, 2017-10-20 at 14:46 +0300, Boris Samorodov wrote: > Hi All, > > I have got a host: > --- > bhyve-host% uname -a > FreeBSD sm.bsnet 12.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 12.0-CURRENT #3 r322868: Fri Aug > 25 05:25:26 MSK 2017 > bsam@builder.bsnet:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC-FAST  amd64 amd64 > --- > > And a bhyve vm: > --- > bhyve-vm: uname -a > FreeBSD builder.bsnet 12.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 12.0-CURRENT #58 r324782: Fri > Oct 20 05:12:17 MSK 2017 > bsam@builder.bsnet:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/PKG64X  amd64 amd64 > --- > > The only difference at kernel configs is a colored console. :-) > > And here I get some weird (is it?) result at the VM (I expect ntpd to be > more stable): > --- > bhyve-vm% for t in `jot 10`; do ntpq -pn; sleep 64; done >      remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset > jitter > ============================================================================== >  XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u    9   64    3    0.605   -1.202 > 316.407 >  XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u    7   64    7    0.605   -1.202 > 358.395 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u    5   64   17    0.615  -328.42 > 181.405 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u    3   64   37    0.615  -328.42 > 214.868 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   67   64   37    0.615  -328.42 > 214.868 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   63   64   77    0.615  -328.42 > 268.618 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   60   64  177    0.615  -328.42 > 333.175 >  XX.XX.XX.1      .STEP.          16 u 1910   64    0    0.000    0.000 > 0.000 >  XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   27   64    1    0.703  -262.63 > 0.004 >  XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   31   64    1    0.649  -331.43 > 68.800 > --- > > At the same time host's results are very stable: > --- > bhyve-host% for t in `jot 10`; do ntpq -pn; sleep 64; done >      remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset > jitter > ============================================================================== > > > > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u    1   64    1    0.401    0.176 > 0.106 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u    6   64    3    0.401    0.176 > 0.459 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u    3   64    7    0.401    0.176 > 0.940 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   67   64    7    0.401    0.176 > 0.940 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   64   64   17    0.401    0.176 > 1.566 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   60   64   37    0.448    1.275 > 1.739 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   55   64   77    0.448    1.275 > 2.365 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   53   64  177    0.448    1.275 > 3.110 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   50   64  377    0.448    1.275 > 3.929 > *XX.XX.XX.1      XX.XX.XX.245     4 u   45   64  377    0.443    8.750 > 4.722 > --- > > The network is organized via bridge -- host igb and vm tap interfaces > are members of one bridge. > > Are those results expected? Does it smell like a bug? Should I dig > furter? > So it is repeatedly stepping the clock in the VM? (Set kern.timecounter.stepwarnings=1 to log steps).  That is usually a sign that the chosen timecounter is running at a different frequency than it claimed to be when it registered itself -- the host may not be emulating the timer hardware properly in the guest.  What is the output of sysctl kern.timecounter in the vm? Also, what is the output of ntptime(8) in the vm? -- Ian