Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:47:50 -0600 From: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@freebsd.org> Cc: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: TSC calibration in virtual machines Message-ID: <CAOtMX2gcUybMhPdEzBWX07-oPdmJdqn%2BvW7KkNZvs2sFmcHFNw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4d7957f6-9497-19ff-4dbb-436bb6b05a56@FreeBSD.org> References: <8ac353c5-d188-f432-aab1-86f4ca5fd295@FreeBSD.org> <4d7957f6-9497-19ff-4dbb-436bb6b05a56@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:36 AM, Jung-uk Kim <jkim@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 06/27/2018 03:14, Andriy Gapon wrote: > > > > It seems that TSC calibration in virtual machines sometimes can do more > harm > > than good. Should we default to trusting the information provided by a > hypervisor? > > > > Specifically, I am observing a problem on GCE instances where calibrated > TSC > > frequency is about 10% lower than advertised frequency. And apparently > the > > advertised frequency is the right one. > > > > I found this thread with similar reports and a variety of workarounds > from > > administratively disabling the calibration to switching to a different > timecounter: > > https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-cloud/2017- > January/000080.html > > We already do that for VMware hosts since r221214. > > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/221214 > > We should do the same for each hypervisor. > > Jung-uk Kim > > We probably should. But why does calibration fail in the first place? If it can fail in a VM, then it can probably fail on bare metal too. It would be worth investigating.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOtMX2gcUybMhPdEzBWX07-oPdmJdqn%2BvW7KkNZvs2sFmcHFNw>