From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FXwb7-0005Ri-J9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:39:09 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FXwb5-0005RR-C2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:39:09 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FXwb4-0005RN-W2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:39:07 -0400 Received: from [195.252.0.52] (helo=zebra.uas.se) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FXwdG-0002iQ-VE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 04:41:23 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([195.252.0.249]) by zebra.uas.se (PMDF V6.0-24 #39208) with ESMTP id <01M1MSXDT7HQ00O4F5@zebra.uas.se> for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:39:00 +0200 Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:38:56 +0200 From: Dan Sandberg Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] -kernel-kqemu - bug with -m 256 In-reply-to: <44494A1D.4040202@wasp.net.au> Message-id: <444C8EA0.8020402@medsci.uu.se> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <20060208230434.GA28760@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> <20060209012752.GA30423@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> <41e41e7a0602090046p18e89050m79c914f5293b2ade@mail.gmail.com> <20060209180531.GA13429@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org> <43EBBBBE.3070604@us.ibm.com> <20060419173103.GG15855@narn.hozed.org> <44494A1D.4040202@wasp.net.au> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Brad Campbell wrote: > Troy Benjegerdes wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 04:01:34PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> >>> Jim C. Brown wrote: >>> >>>> -kernel-kqemu virtualizes ring 0 code. >>>> >>>> So it basically makes qemu do what VMware does. >>>> >>>> IIRC someone reported a 33% speedup with the new option. >>>> >>> >>> That was me. That was a 33% speedup on win2k startup time. kqemu >>> (user only) has a negligible impact on win2k startup time which >>> suggests this is mostly ring 0 code running which would make it a >>> good benchmark for kernel-kqemu performance. >>> >>> This was a terribly unscientific benchmarking so don't read too much >>> into it. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Anthony Liguori >> >> >> My win2k guest (with SP4, but not any updates) seemed to hang on startup >> with -kernel-kqemu. > > > Are you using -m 256 by any chance? I get this result with around that > much ram allocated to the guest. -m 160 (or less) or -m 384 (or more) > works perfectly here.. > > > Great tip -thank you! I have been having the same headache as others: Linux and RectOS guests constantly crashing in the very same spot when -kernel-kqemu is enabled. I just made a quick test adding -m 384 and ReactOS suddenly boots all the way with -kernel-kqemu enabled! My test line was: qemu.exe -kernel-kqemu -m 384 -L ./bios -boot c -hda c.img Best regards, Dan Sandberg