From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KD4qv-0002eF-OJ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:54:33 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KD4qu-0002d9-5D
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:54:33 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41997 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KD4qu-0002d6-0t
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:54:32 -0400
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:34504)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1KD4qt-0007Di-Tm
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:54:32 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/3] Change qemu_set_irq() to return
	status information.
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 22:54:28 +0100
References: <20080629140120.5626.1590.stgit@gleb-debian.qumranet.com.qumranet.com>
	<200806292216.10253.paul@codesourcery.com> <486802EE.40100@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <486802EE.40100@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200806292254.28512.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
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@qumranet.com>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>

> > That's exactly what -icount auto does. It gradually varies the virtual
> > clock rate to keep it in line with the outside world. You get some clock
> > skew, but that true whatever you do (including the proposed patch).
>
> Interesting. This seems to require a closer look, and maybe some
> quantification of the potential overhead.

About 10% slower than normal qemu in my measurements.

Paul