From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H0iee-0001Az-1a for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 13:10:00 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1H0iec-0001Ak-NK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 13:09:58 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H0iec-0001Ah-Il for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 13:09:58 -0500 Received: from [88.212.205.2] (helo=mail.sub.ru) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1H0ieb-0007Ov-W6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 13:09:58 -0500 Received: from unknown ([88.212.205.2]) by localhost (mail-new.sub.ru [88.212.205.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with SMTP id STv08YTypGsl for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2006 21:14:16 +0300 (MSK) From: Mikhail Ramendik Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 18:09:30 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200612301809.30656.mr@ramendik.ru> Subject: [Qemu-devel] win98 slow with kqemu 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 Hello, Some time ago I reported win98 slowness with kqemu, see http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2006-05/msg00295.html I have tried again, this time on a Pentium 4 (Prescott) 3 GHz system, with Debian sarge and backports.org 2.6.18 kernel; qemu 0.8.2 and kqemu 1.3.0pre9 are locally compiled, not packaged. Still I see visible slowness with win98 guest and kqemu; it is slower than win98 guest without kqemu. The amnhld.vxd idlesness driver is installed. The problem is mentioned in forums periodically, i.e. the last reply in http://qemu-forum.ipi.fi/viewtopic.php?t=2015 . I would really like to have this fixed; I am somewhat experienced and will do what is needed for testing etc. I would try some CPU "mark" tests for a more objective check - but which of them will work without DirectX? -- Yours, Mikhail Ramendik