From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Dncfi-0002p9-MV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:32:11 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Dncfc-0002kl-NE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:32:07 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Dncfc-0002cV-EL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:32:04 -0400 Received: from [213.165.64.20] (helo=mail.gmx.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DncZh-0008Mp-M0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:25:57 -0400 Message-ID: <42C2A042.4050304@gmx.de> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:21:06 +0200 From: Oliver Gerlich MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Timing problems References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; 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: Alexander Toresson , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Alexander Toresson wrote: > I'm running windows 2000 in qemu 0.7.0 with kqemu 0.6.2-1 on i386 > debian linux. First thing I tried to do was to run a benchmark program > (qemu w/o kqemu vs qemu w/ kqemu). I got strange results, and I also > noted that timing didn't seem to be that good, so I re-tried to run > the benchmark program, but with the date & clock settings window in > the background. This is the result: The more cpu that is used in the > virtual cpu, the faster time flies by. For example, when it's nearly > idle, time is too slow. If it goes from idle to 100% cpu-use, time > flies by at 5x the speed it should. This is true both when I use kqemu > and when I don't. This cpu is capable of speedstep, but I have > disabled it while doing this test. I think I would get even more weird > results if I enabled it. > This makes it impossible to run a benchmark and get any useful results > out of it. Also, trying to run a game on qemu would be a disaster. Not necessarily, Age of Empires 2 runs quite well under Qemu + Win98SE (on an Athlon 2600+, host: Debian Linux, kernel 2.6.9). > However, running normal programs aren't any problem. Except that I > have to be very quick when changing resolution in w2k (it should wait > 15s, now time flies away and those 15 becomes 2s :)). > > Before compiling qemu 0.7.0 with kqemu 0.6.2-1, I ran qemu > 0.6.something, taken from the debian testing repository, and it had > the same problem. > > Regards, Alexander Toresson > > PS. I'm susprised nobody has seen this problem before. Is it just me > who experience it? Although I use Visual Studio 5 and Age of Empires 2 inside Qemu (with Win98SE and Win2k), I never noticed such problems, and the Windows clock always seemed quite right (and VC++ stresses the CPU quite a lot!). But admittedly I never ran benchmarks or had a closer look at the guest system time. Regards, Oliver Gerlich > > > _______________________________________________ > Qemu-devel mailing list > Qemu-devel@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel > >