From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] KVM: In-kernel PIT model Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:14:32 +0200 Message-ID: <47947088.5030309@qumranet.com> References: <200801211718.23664.sheng.yang@intel.com> <47946B96.4040508@siemens.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: Jan Kiszka Return-path: In-Reply-To: <47946B96.4040508-kv7WeFo6aLtBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> 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 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. > > I'm currently struggling with emulating a proprietary platform that has > (among other specialties...) a different PIT base frequency, and I > already had to patch user space qemu for customizable frequencies. Maybe > this kernel extension is a good chance to generalize the PIT setup, and > I would be happy to contribute to this if there is a consensus. > Certainly an ioctl() to configure the PIT can be added. I think that we can leave that to a later patch though. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/