From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/21] Remove host_alarm_timer hacks. Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:53:09 +0300 Message-ID: <49F9C965.3010303@redhat.com> References: <1241040038-17183-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <1241040038-17183-19-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <49F972EB.3040208@redhat.com> <49F9A56C.5000705@us.ibm.com> <49F9A6BA.5040702@redhat.com> <49F9A97D.7050004@us.ibm.com> <49F9C7BB.1080908@redhat.com> <49F9C880.3080802@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:57517 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933238AbZD3PxM (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:53:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: <49F9C880.3080802@us.ibm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Anthony Liguori wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: >>> >>> Do we really care about optimizing latency with -clock rtc though? >>> >> >> People still run kvm on RHEL 5 (or cheap clones thereof), aren't they >> affected? > > Do they use -clock rtc? -clock dynticks should still work on RHEL 5 > it's just that you won't get very accurate timer events. > > You can only use -clock rtc with a single guest at a time so I doubt > people use it seriously. The other option would be -clock unix but I > can't see why you'd use -clock unix instead of -clock dynticks. > > The only reason to keep -clock unix around is for non Linux unices. > Oh, okay then. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function