From: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Beth Kon <eak@us.ibm.com>, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Add HPET emulation to qemu (v2)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:38:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080802113812.GD4535@implementation> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1217675114-17670-1-git-send-email-eak@us.ibm.com>
Beth Kon, le Sat 02 Aug 2008 06:05:14 -0500, a écrit :
> I was trying to reproduce the wakeup every 10ms that
> Samuel Thibault mentioned, thinking the HPET would improve it.
> But for an idle guest in both cases (with and without HPET), the
> number of wakeups per second was relatively low (28).
I was referring to vl.c's timeout = 10; which makes the select call
use a timeout of 10ms. That said, "/* If all cpus are halted then wait
until the next IRQ */", so maybe that's why you get slower wakeups per
second. I'm still surprised because of the call to qemu_mod_timer in
pit_irq_timer_update which should setup at least a 100Hz timer with
linux guests (when they don't have HPET available).
Samuel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Beth Kon <eak@us.ibm.com>, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH] Add HPET emulation to qemu (v2)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:38:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080802113812.GD4535@implementation> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1217675114-17670-1-git-send-email-eak@us.ibm.com>
Beth Kon, le Sat 02 Aug 2008 06:05:14 -0500, a écrit :
> I was trying to reproduce the wakeup every 10ms that
> Samuel Thibault mentioned, thinking the HPET would improve it.
> But for an idle guest in both cases (with and without HPET), the
> number of wakeups per second was relatively low (28).
I was referring to vl.c's timeout = 10; which makes the select call
use a timeout of 10ms. That said, "/* If all cpus are halted then wait
until the next IRQ */", so maybe that's why you get slower wakeups per
second. I'm still surprised because of the call to qemu_mod_timer in
pit_irq_timer_update which should setup at least a 100Hz timer with
linux guests (when they don't have HPET available).
Samuel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-02 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-02 11:05 [RFC][PATCH] Add HPET emulation to qemu (v2) Beth Kon
2008-08-02 11:05 ` [Qemu-devel] " Beth Kon
2008-08-02 11:38 ` Samuel Thibault [this message]
2008-08-02 11:38 ` Samuel Thibault
2008-08-02 14:46 ` Anthony Liguori
2008-08-02 17:21 ` Samuel Thibault
2008-08-02 17:21 ` Samuel Thibault
2008-08-02 17:26 ` Samuel Thibault
2008-08-12 16:33 ` Beth Kon
2008-08-12 16:33 ` Beth Kon
2008-08-02 11:42 ` Paul Brook
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-08-02 3:24 Beth Kon
2008-08-01 23:23 Beth Kon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080802113812.GD4535@implementation \
--to=samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=eak@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.