From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 21 17:24:49 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1321065688 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:24:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@rewt.org.uk) Received: from abby.lhr1.as41113.net (abby.lhr1.as41113.net [91.208.177.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A64878FC1D for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:24:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jasmine.internethq (unknown [91.208.177.192]) by abby.lhr1.as41113.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC15B2280C for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.16.11.44] (jwh-laptop.internethq [172.16.11.44]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by jasmine.internethq (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA7E2106AAFC7; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:25:02 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4F1AF4D9.8030100@rewt.org.uk> Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:24:41 +0000 From: Joe Holden User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ronald Klop References: <4F15D643.8000907@rewt.org.uk> <20120118075049.289954e8@zelda.sugioarto.com> <20120121101842.786fc402@zelda.sugioarto.com> <20120121141151.0ee68aa3@zelda.sugioarto.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Stable Mailing List , Martin Sugioarto Subject: Re: Timekeeping in stable/9 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:24:49 -0000 Ronald Klop wrote: > On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 14:11:51 +0100, Martin Sugioarto > wrote: > >> Am Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:20:51 +0100 >> schrieb "Ronald Klop" : >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> As I understand it. >>> Host: FreeBSD 9 >>> Guest: WinXP >>> >>> Which one has troubles with its clock? The host or the guest or both? >> >> Hi, >> >> only inside VirtualBox, I think it's only an application problem and >> my emails would be probably better addressed to ports@. ONLY the guest >> is affected when host is loaded. >> >> I noticed additionally: >> >> You get better results with a desync'ed clock in the guest system, when >> you start "openssl speed -multi 20" or similar. Within a few seconds the >> clock gets a 20 seconds difference. >> >>> How many CPU's did you assign to the guest? >>> Did you install virtualbox guest additions to the guest? >> >> Here a few details (guest additions are installed): >> >> Memory size: 1600MB >> Page Fusion: off >> VRAM size: 256MB >> HPET: on/off (tried both settings) >> Chipset: piix3 >> Firmware: BIOS >> Number of CPUs: 1 >> Synthetic Cpu: off >> CPUID overrides: None >> [...] >> ACPI: on >> IOAPIC: off >> PAE: on >> Time offset: 0 ms >> RTC: local time >> Hardw. virt.ext: on >> Hardw. virt.ext exclusive: on >> Nested Paging: on >> Large Pages: on >> VT-x VPID: on >> [...] >> 3D Acceleration: off >> 2D Video Acceleration: on >> >>> Do you run NTP on the guest XP also? If yes, turn it off. >> >> Windows XP default installation (synch'ed to time.windows.com). >> Switching this off, does not have any influence. I think MS-Windows >> does not do continuous synchronization, only at system start, I guess. >> >>> VBox guest additions can sync the guest clock with the host. >> >> I'll try to deinstall them. But I somehow like my shared folder. >> >>> BTW: My experience with VBox is that it is nice for hobby stuff, but >>> not for heavy load server stuff. VMWare does a better job there. >> >> Yes. I know. Still VirtualBox ist nice and cheap solution. >> >> -- >> Martin > > BTW: I used VBox on Linux at work. Same problems. Different problems > come and go with different versions of Linux in combination with > different versions of VirtualBox. Using VmWare ESXI solved it. If you > search a lot on the vmware website you will find a free version. > > Ronald. In the extreme case I have here, the host isn't taxed at all, cpu, disk i/o and such are almost idle but the time is skewed dramatically regardless. For reference the settings I have are: 4 VCPUS (4 physical cores) 1GB ram ICH9, SAS controller If I toggle the sysctl in my previous post the problem goes way, and doesn't return even if the sysctl is changed back... until a reboot of course. None of the pre-9 guests (there are quite a few spread across a couple of identical machines) exhibit the behaviour, nor does this particular one when reverted to a pre-upgrade snapshot, so in this case it is certainly not the hardware but whatever is used to keep track of the "ticks" (terminology probably incorrect) Thanks, J