From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48699)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>) id 1VEgLN-0002gD-FW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:03:39 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>) id 1VEgLH-0004mN-5b
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:03:33 -0400
Received: from nodalink.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.105.220]:33732
	helo=paradis.irqsave.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>) id 1VEgLG-0004m8-ST
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:03:27 -0400
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:05:24 +0200
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>
Message-ID: <20130828140524.GD6170@irqsave.net>
References: <20130827073833.GB24247@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
	<521D0B84.8040301@rdsoftware.de> <521D1AB0.1070904@redhat.com>
	<20130828075020.GA4696@stefanha-thinkpad.muc.redhat.com>
	<163348110.541056.1377680875692.open-xchange@email.1und1.de>
	<521DF7C1.50805@redhat.com> <20130828133410.GB6170@irqsave.net>
	<521DFDF6.3070507@redhat.com> <20130828135143.GC6170@irqsave.net>
	<521E0247.7060202@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <521E0247.7060202@redhat.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Boot Problems Windows XP guest
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beno=EEt?= Canet <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>, Erik Rull <erik.rull@rdsoftware.de>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>

> Yes, I'm afraid that the burst is problematic here since the current
> throttling algorithm doesn't help (and IIUC it behaves as if it had
> max=3Davg/10 due to the 100ms slice time).  This is Windows so no CFQ
> here.  Do you need to set bps_max=3D1 or will bps_max=3D0 work too?

In it's current state the code will overwrite the burst if it's set small=
er than
avg/10.
The result will be a small initial spike of size avg/10 then it will cap =
to avg.

Best regards

Beno=EEt