From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/12] fake ACPI C2 emulation v2
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 00:12:28 -0300
Message-ID: <20080605031228.GA13046@dmt.cnet>
References: <20080529222249.563011248@localhost.localdomain> <48426A19.4010000@qumranet.com> <20080602160859.GA3502@dmt.cnet> <48467345.90703@qumranet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>,
	Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>,
	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:59173 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751162AbYFEDMt (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:12:49 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <48467345.90703@qumranet.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 01:49:41PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>
>> Test is 1 million gettimeofday calls, Xeon 1.60GHz with 4MB L2.
>>
>> guest (qemu emulation):
>> cycles:1189759332
>>
>> guest (in-kernel emulation):
>> cycles:628046412
>>
>> guest (direct pmtimer):
>> cycles:230372934
>>
>> host (TSC):
>> cycles:14862774
>>
>
> Ratio is 1:15:80
>
> Looks like direct pmtimer is still quite slow. Are there any exits with 
> direct pmtimer, or is it all due to the ioport latency?

host (pmtimer):
cycles:225768390

So its getting close-to-native performance. As you mentioned earlier,
acpi_pm can't benefit from vsyscalls.