From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Otte Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] KVM: In-kernel PIT model Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:28:32 +0100 Message-ID: <479473D0.7000002@de.ibm.com> References: <200801211718.23664.sheng.yang@intel.com> <47946B96.4040508@siemens.com> Reply-To: carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, Avi Kivity 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. 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). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/