From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BAr6h-0003eb-S1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Apr 2004 09:59:15 -0400 Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BAr69-0003SJ-OJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Apr 2004 09:59:14 -0400 Received: from [199.232.41.8] (helo=mx20.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.30) id 1BAr69-0003Pt-9S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Apr 2004 09:58:41 -0400 Received: from [203.29.88.42] (helo=gateway.ccdaust.com.au) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BAqbz-0007lP-66 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 Apr 2004 09:27:31 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.80] (helo=wasp.net.au) by gateway.ccdaust.com.au with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BAqpz-0006HT-00 for ; Tue, 06 Apr 2004 21:42:00 +0800 Message-ID: <4072B070.3060700@wasp.net.au> Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 17:28:16 +0400 From: Brad Campbell MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Qemu workstation References: <200404051047.11383.jm@poure.com> <1081156203.3939.10.camel@aragorn> <4071B41F.3040201@bellard.org> <001601c41b57$ed1704f0$6407a8c0@shaggy> <20040406121738.GC2774@linux-m68k.org> In-Reply-To: <20040406121738.GC2774@linux-m68k.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 Richard Zidlicky wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 10:49:51PM +0100, Jamie Burns wrote: > >>>I am not sure that handling multiple VMs running at the same time is >>>very useful (some architectural changes are needed in QEMU). But >>>switching easily between VM configurations seems interesting. >> >>I think that multiple VM's is a worthy goal as long as you can minimise CPU >>usage. Having multiple VM's gives you the ability to do some very cool >>things. I use VMWARE in Windows and sometimes have both Linux and FreeBSD >>running in VM's so I can test software against all 3 OS's at once. I imagine >>it would be very useful to developers of cluster software. >> >>I tried the Win32 port the other day, running Linux, and it sat using 100% >>of the CPU whilst doing next to nothing at a command prompt. Using VMWARE, >>and waiting at a command prompt uses very little CPU time. >> >>Is QEMU sat in a busy loop all the time? > > > it is not QEMU but the hosted OS that is in the busy loop. QEMU > will have to recognise "idle loops" to fix this - this could be > really tricky. I guess if QEMU emulates the hlt instruction and the OS supports it then it's pretty easy. I note above it said running linux, which does idle nicely when the hlt instruction is present, perhaps there is a not too difficult way for intelligent OS's. DOS is a lost cause however. Brad