From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FOChu-0007Dv-UC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 06:49:54 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FOCht-0007BV-Gz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 06:49:54 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FOCht-0007BN-E4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 06:49:53 -0500 Received: from [203.190.192.17] (helo=wasp.net.au) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FOCjb-0002Mk-IU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Mar 2006 06:51:40 -0500 Message-ID: <44292319.5060500@wasp.net.au> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 15:50:49 +0400 From: Brad Campbell MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] kqemu version 1.3.0pre5 References: <44285974.9040003@bellard.org> <000e01c6525b$9149eb00$0464a8c0@athlon> In-Reply-To: <000e01c6525b$9149eb00$0464a8c0@athlon> 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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Kazu wrote: > I tested Linux guest/WinXP host but the host OS crashed. I believe -kernel-kqemu is still somewhat experimental on Windows host. > Redhat 7.2 guest/Fedora Core 4 host with normal kqemu is slower > than -no-kqemu. Why ? Have you got your tmpfs set up correctly so qemu can place its memory swap file in a ramdisk rather than on disk? /dev/hda1 4.6G 3.1G 1.4G 69% / tmpfs 506M 0 506M 0% /dev/shm /dev/hda2 4.6G 4.5G 103M 98% /home /dev/hda6 44G 44G 424K 100% /tracks none 768M 137M 632M 18% /tmp <-- not sure why it says none.. it's tmpfs Regards, Brad -- "Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." -- Douglas Adams