Port-xen archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: timekeeping regression?



At Sun, 04 Feb 2024 14:03:37 -0800, "Greg A. Woods" <woods%planix.ca@localhost> wrote:
Subject: Re: timekeeping regression?
>
>   This is a domU running on xenful, the "bad" PE2950, after almost
> 4 days of uptime:
>
>      remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
> ==============================================================================
> *xentastic.local 206.108.0.132    2 u  808 1024  377    0.125  -27.501  18.602

So since then the dom0 on the "bad" machine has drifted way ahead in time:

22:00 [xenful] # uptime
10:00PM  up 17 days,  9:43, 3 users, load averages: 0.39, 0.34, 0.20
22:00 [xenful] # ntpq -p
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
==============================================================================
 xentastic.local 192.75.191.16    3 u   31   64  377    0.005  -378226 28449.7

... and all the other VMs have drifted badly in the opposite direction,H:

19:25 [nbtcur] # uptime
 7:25PM  up 14 days, 21:28, 1 user, load averages: 0.28, 0.13, 0.04
19:25 [nbtcur] # ntpq -p
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
==============================================================================
 xentastic.local 192.75.191.16    3 u  500 1024  377    1.205  +572972 404499.



On the "good" machine the dom0 is still A-OK:

11:25 [xentastic] # uptime
11:25AM  up 17 days, 20:19, 2 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
11:25 [xentastic] # ntpq -p
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
==============================================================================
 local-bcast.loc .BCST.          16 B    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 0.north-america .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 1.north-america .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 2.north-america .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 3.north-america .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 ca.pool.ntp.org .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 0.netbsd.pool.n .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 1.netbsd.pool.n .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 2.netbsd.pool.n .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
 3.netbsd.pool.n .POOL.          16 p    -   64    0    0.000   +0.000   0.001
+time13.nrc.ca   132.246.11.231   2 u  309 1024  377   63.438   -0.123   0.292
#time2.chu.nrc.c 209.87.233.52    2 u  282 1024  377   91.675   -8.920  14.318
-ntp1.torix.ca   .PTP0.           1 u  441 1024  377   53.818   -2.630   0.367
-ntp2.torix.ca   .PTP0.           1 u  268 1024  377   55.355   -1.144   2.768
-ntp3.torix.ca   .PTP0.           1 u  607 1024  377   55.217   -3.842   0.475
+ntp1.yycix.ca   206.108.0.132    2 u 1000 1024  377   21.049   -0.497   0.379
*ntp2.yycix.ca   10.0.17.1        2 u  225 1024  377   21.547   -0.127   0.383


... and the FreeBSD VM is also OK:

11:26 [fezzik] # uptime
11:26AM  up 17 days, 20:19, 3 users, load averages: 1.36, 0.98, 0.91
11:26 [fezzik] # ntpq -p
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
==============================================================================
*xentastic.local 192.75.191.16    3 u  190 1024  377    0.143  -14.229  17.002


... but one NetBSD VM has drifted significantly:

10:02 [nbtest] # uptime
10:02AM  up 17 days, 18:54, 1 user, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
10:02 [nbtest] # ntpq -p
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
==============================================================================
 xentastic.local 192.75.191.16    3 u 1199 1024  377    0.074  +490416 30217.3


> According to some discussions I found on the internets the Xen kernel
> itself could/should now use TSC on systems where TSC is either
> effectively or actually stable across cores (and I think it will
> automatically in certain conditions where TSC is guaranteed safe), and
> so I tried appending "clocksource=tsc tsc=stable:socket" to the Xen
> command line on the two PE2950s, but that didn't seem to change anything
> (i.e. the Xen platform timer stays configured as HPET).  The most recent
> Xen code says, as I read it, that it should print a debug message if the
> configured clocksource isn't valid, but even with "loglvl=all" there's
> no such message appearing.  More digging and debugging to do.  I really
> would like to get Xen using TSC as its platform timer and see if that
> makes any difference.

Still looking for a Round Tuit to do the investigation into why
"clocksource=tsc" isn't taking effect, and it'll have to wait a couple
more weeks now, so if anyone else beats me to it.....

--
					Greg A. Woods <gwoods%acm.org@localhost>

Kelowna, BC     +1 250 762-7675           RoboHack <woods%robohack.ca@localhost>
Planix, Inc. <woods%planix.com@localhost>     Avoncote Farms <woods%avoncote.ca@localhost>

Attachment: pgpgelMNkV41H.pgp
Description: OpenPGP Digital Signature



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index