From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Yang, Sheng" Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] KVM: In-kernel PIT model Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:15:51 +0800 Message-ID: <200801220915.51889.sheng.yang@intel.com> References: <200801211718.23664.sheng.yang@intel.com> <47946B96.4040508@siemens.com> <479473D0.7000002@de.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, Jan Kiszka , Avi Kivity To: carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <479473D0.7000002-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Monday 21 January 2008 18:28:32 Carsten Otte wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: > > The PIT may not be limited to x86 platforms. So I would propose to make > > the setup more generic and flexible. And I would move the code out of > > arch/x86, just the speaker support should remain there. > > It should also not be common among all archs. On s390 we have CPU > timer, which is way superior to PIT (clock cycle granularity, no > vmexit to set it up or deliver the irq, no hypervisor support needed > because it works transparent). Yeah, I also checked IA64 side, and it didn't got PIT too. So I put it in x86 directory. -- Thanks Yang, Sheng ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/