From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G5iUn-00067E-9i
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:28:13 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G5iUi-00062k-Jc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:28:11 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5iUi-00062X-8x
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:28:08 -0400
Received: from [65.74.133.4] (helo=mail.codesourcery.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1G5iWF-0007JP-Bx
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:29:43 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: high CPU load / async IO?
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:27:49 +0100
References: <ea0u9u$gci$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<200607261321.35291.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<20060726122358.GF4044@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <20060726122358.GF4044@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200607261327.50068.paul@codesourcery.com>
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

On Wednesday 26 July 2006 13:23, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26 2006, Paul Brook wrote:
> > > Sounds good, so at least it's on its way :-)
> > > It's on of those big items left on the TODO, so will be good to see go
> > > in. Then one should implement an ahci host controller for queued
> > > command support next...
> >
> > Or use the scsi emulation :-)
>
> Ah, did not know that queueing was fully implemented there yet!

It isn't, but it's nearer than the SATA emulation!

Paul