Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Timer/clock for Linux

[Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>]

Paul Brook wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 April 2006 14:01, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > Paul Brook wrote:
> > > One solution (which is also desirable for other reasons) is to
> > > implement some form of guest cycle counting based on the
> > > instructions actually executed.  Then use that as the high-precision
> > > timesource, and use some for of adaptive method to keep host and
> > > guest clocks in sync.
> >
> > That's what I meant, expressed more clearly, except that I meant to
> > count guest time based on the real time spent executing guest code,
> > rather than counting individual instructions.  Thanks!
> 
> How do you propose doing that? It implies you have some way of interrupting 
> the guest after it has executed a small amount of guest code, where "small" 
> is less than the resolution+latency of host timer interrupts.

Hmm.  I hadn't thought that through, but it still works.

It doesn't matter if the guest runs, say, for 20ms before its next
emulated 1kHz interrupt - so long as it's not dependent on values from
the emulated timer chip after 1ms (or any other emulated device which
reveals the time).

If the guest does read a device which depends on the time, that's an
opportunity to interrupt it.  Otherwise, from the guest's view, it's
just as if the emulated CPU got faster for a while with the interrupts
perfectly timed.

-- Jamie