From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FYYPd-0001Sr-Tg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:01:49 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FYYPc-0001SY-SV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:01:49 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FYYPc-0001SV-Ns for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:01:48 -0400 Received: from [209.234.73.39] (helo=narn.hozed.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1FYYSC-0005up-8D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 21:04:28 -0400 Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:01:46 -0500 From: Troy Benjegerdes Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Windows 2000 issues questions Message-ID: <20060426010146.GT15855@narn.hozed.org> References: <41e41e7a0604100819y54272d80nf944f8e1dc039310@mail.gmail.com> <443A84D1.2050600@wasp.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <443A84D1.2050600@wasp.net.au> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 08:16:17PM +0400, Brad Campbell wrote: > Hetz Ben Hamo wrote: > >I'm sorry to bring this issues back from the dead: > > > >* Full disk issues > >* Service pack issues > > > >I Do know that both these issues have been dealt before, but yet, > >there is no "fix" from the QEMU application itself, compared to the > >"competitors".. > > > >One thing that I don't understand is: are these issues related to DMA > >implementation in QEMU or rather to a specific chipset implementation? > > Just to back up what Leo said.. I have his %16 -win2k-hack patch installed > (which is required as you need to add the delay to DMA IO also) and if I > leave -win2k-hack enabled I find very little performance degradation.. in > addition to it enabling windows update to work. I'm sure it's either > slowing down the VM or wasting cpu cycles, but it does work and does not > knock things about noticeably (and I test on a PIII-M 1Ghz running at > 750Mhz to give kinda worst case performance testing) > > I do recall not having these issues with an async-io patch installed, but > the last async-io patch I used changed the virtual ide controller and made > all my vm's useless. I'm somewhat reticent to install another patch that is > going to require me to re-install all my vm's.. but if there is one > floating about that does not change the virtual hardware and is pretty self > contained I'd be more than happy to run it through my test suite. I'd be happy to test a patch that changes the virtual IDE controller to one that works better, since I can't seem to get a win2k vm installed and updated at all anyway ;)