From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LKZbj-0003E4-IF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:42:07 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LKZbg-0003Dh-UR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:42:05 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45417 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LKZbg-0003De-Rb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:42:04 -0500
Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr ([212.27.42.1]:43620)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <revol@free.fr>) id 1LKZbg-0003Sr-5t
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 09:42:04 -0500
Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8492B9402C5
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed,  7 Jan 2009 15:41:56 +0100 (CET)
Received: from laptop (vaf26-2-82-244-111-82.fbx.proxad.net [82.244.111.82])
	by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C4699400DB
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed,  7 Jan 2009 15:41:54 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <5029199D-F551-40F9-BC62-A4A7D2C4C580@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] [RFC] Make vmport report
	the	=?utf-8?q?processor_speed?=
From: "=?utf-8?q?Fran=C3=A7ois?= Revol" <revol@free.fr>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 15:48:04 +0100 CET
Message-Id: <12976861769-BeMail@laptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

> > Do we implement them yet =3F grep got me some MSR=5FIA32=5FTSC in kvm.c,  
> > so I
> > suppose yes.
> 
> That is the TSC value MSR I guess. So no, we don't implement them 
> yet.  
> But that sounds like a way better interface to me than the VMware  
> backdoor ;).

Maybe implementing it properly would fix running ESX without the need 
for vmport =3F

> 
> > Oh, I didn't notice rdtscp, might be interesting to use instead for
> > Haiku.
> 
> Maybe using a PV clocksource is even better ...

=3F

Fran=C3=A7ois.