i'm testing the attached patch. i'm tempted to remove the guest part as well. but i wonder if it has been tested on vmware and/or kvm. On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 3:05 PM Taylor R Campbell <riastradh%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote: > > No objection here, I just wanted to go for the minimal change adequate > to fix the problem and pull it up to 11 promptly. > > > > Date: Fri, 1 May 2026 11:46:30 +0900 > > From: Takashi YAMAMOTO <yamt9999%gmail.com@localhost> > > > > i feel it's simpler to remove the leaf. > > > > On Fri, May 1, 2026 at 9:46 AM Taylor R Campbell <riastradh%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote: > > > > > > Module Name: src > > > Committed By: riastradh > > > Date: Fri May 1 00:46:30 UTC 2026 > > > > > > Modified Files: > > > src/sys/dev/nvmm/x86: nvmm_x86_svm.c nvmm_x86_vmx.c > > > > > > Log Message: > > > nvmm: Don't report physical lapic freq as virtual lapic freq. > > > > > > The virtual lapic emulated by qemu in software always ticks at 1 GHz, > > > but the physical lapic on my laptop, for example, ticks at 24 MHz. > > > > > > In order for this to work as iMil intended, we need some way for the > > > hypervisor (such as qemu) to tell nvmm what its lapic frequency is. > > > Until we have that, we can't correctly report any alleged lapic > > > frequency to the guest. > > > > > > PR kern/59424: hardclock ticks run at breakneck pace under qemu > > > > > > > > > To generate a diff of this commit: > > > cvs rdiff -u -r1.93 -r1.94 src/sys/dev/nvmm/x86/nvmm_x86_svm.c \ > > > src/sys/dev/nvmm/x86/nvmm_x86_vmx.c > > > > > > Please note that diffs are not public domain; they are subject to the > > > copyright notices on the relevant files. > > >
Attachment:
a.diff
Description: Binary data