On Tue, 2024-07-16 at 15:20 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
> On 16.07.24 14:32, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On 16 July 2024 12:54:52 BST, Peter Hilber
> > wrote:
> > > On 11.07.24 09:50, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2024-07-11 at 09:25 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > IMHO thi
On Tue, 2024-07-16 at 13:54 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
> On 08.07.24 11:27, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Time according to time_type field above.
> > + */
> > + uint64_t time_sec; /* Seconds since time_type epoch */
> > + uint64_t time_f
On 16.07.24 14:32, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On 16 July 2024 12:54:52 BST, Peter Hilber
> wrote:
>> On 11.07.24 09:50, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2024-07-11 at 09:25 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
IMHO this phrasing is better, since it directly refers to the state of the
structu
On 16 July 2024 12:54:52 BST, Peter Hilber wrote:
>On 11.07.24 09:50, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Thu, 2024-07-11 at 09:25 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
>>>
>>> IMHO this phrasing is better, since it directly refers to the state of the
>>> structure.
>>
>> Thanks. I'll update it.
>>
>>> AFAIU if t
On 08.07.24 11:27, David Woodhouse wrote:
> +
> + /*
> + * Time according to time_type field above.
> + */
> + uint64_t time_sec; /* Seconds since time_type epoch */
> + uint64_t time_frac_sec; /* (seconds >> 64) */
> + uint64_t time_esterror_picosec;
On 11.07.24 09:50, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-07-11 at 09:25 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
>>
>> IMHO this phrasing is better, since it directly refers to the state of the
>> structure.
>
> Thanks. I'll update it.
>
>> AFAIU if there would be abnormal delays in store buffers, causing some
On Thu, 2024-07-11 at 09:25 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
>
> IMHO this phrasing is better, since it directly refers to the state of the
> structure.
Thanks. I'll update it.
> AFAIU if there would be abnormal delays in store buffers, causing some
> driver to still see the old clock for some time, t
On 10.07.24 18:01, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-07-10 at 15:07 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
>> On 08.07.24 11:27, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>> From: David Woodhouse
>>>
>>> The vmclock "device" provides a shared memory region with precision clock
>>> information. By using shared memory, it is
On Wed, 2024-07-10 at 15:07 +0200, Peter Hilber wrote:
> On 08.07.24 11:27, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > From: David Woodhouse
> >
> > The vmclock "device" provides a shared memory region with precision clock
> > information. By using shared memory, it is safe across Live Migration.
> >
> > Like t
On 08.07.24 11:27, David Woodhouse wrote:
> From: David Woodhouse
>
> The vmclock "device" provides a shared memory region with precision clock
> information. By using shared memory, it is safe across Live Migration.
>
> Like the KVM PTP clock, this can convert TSC-based cross timestamps into
>
From: David Woodhouse
The vmclock "device" provides a shared memory region with precision clock
information. By using shared memory, it is safe across Live Migration.
Like the KVM PTP clock, this can convert TSC-based cross timestamps into
KVM clock values. Unlike the KVM PTP clock, it does so o
11 matches
Mail list logo
