From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42308 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PmRXb-0008F1-H3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2011 08:54:08 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1PmRXZ-0000VW-P4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2011 08:54:06 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:3985)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1PmRXZ-0000V7-IQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2011 08:54:05 -0500
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 15:54:00 +0200
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [RFC: 0/2] patch for QEMU HPET periodic timer
	emulation to alleviate time drift
Message-ID: <20110207135400.GG14984@redhat.com>
References: <4D4B5F23.7040801@codemonkey.ws> <4D4BBF55.9060000@web.de>
	<4D4FE6BF.5080502@redhat.com> <4D4FEF81.1040603@codemonkey.ws>
	<4D4FF02F.2030309@redhat.com> <4D4FF24A.7000004@codemonkey.ws>
	<20110207134104.GE14984@redhat.com> <4D4FF7CE.6020005@redhat.com>
	<20110207134821.GF14984@redhat.com> <4D4FF8DF.2070400@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4D4FF8DF.2070400@redhat.com>
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@redhat.com>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>

On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 03:51:27PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/07/2011 03:48 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>
> >>  That's quite pointless, since those interrupts will be coalesced by
> >>  the guest.
> >>
> >Yes, of course, and this is what I remember happening. At this point
> >interrupt de-coalescing kicks in.
> 
> Maybe a more useful API would be to supply the callback with the
> number of missed wakeups since the last callback.  The callback
> could then change the wakeup frequency to compensate, or do other
> clever things.  If it needs the old behaviour, it can just execute
> its code in a loop.
> 
Mat be. Or may be we can ask for new behaviour during timer creation.
I was just surprised about the claim that we lost wakeups.

--
			Gleb.