From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1FY9b8-0000Zd-Ar
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:32:02 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1FY9b5-0000ZP-UN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:32:01 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FY9b5-0000ZM-PJ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:31:59 -0400
Received: from [84.96.92.61] (helo=sMtp.neuf.fr)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FY9dP-0003uj-VQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Apr 2006 18:34:24 -0400
Received: from [84.102.211.156] by sp604002mt.gpm.neuf.ld
	(Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-5.05 (built Feb 16 2006))
	with ESMTP id <0IY800K4EZXAJPU0@sp604002mt.gpm.neuf.ld> for
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:31:58 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 00:31:10 +0200
From: Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] -kernel-kqemu
In-reply-to: <44494A1D.4040202@wasp.net.au>
Message-id: <444D51AE.6090002@bellard.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <20060208230434.GA28760@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org>
	<20060209012752.GA30423@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org>
	<41e41e7a0602090046p18e89050m79c914f5293b2ade@mail.gmail.com>
	<20060209180531.GA13429@jbrown.mylinuxbox.org>
	<43EBBBBE.3070604@us.ibm.com>
	<20060419173103.GG15855@narn.hozed.org> <44494A1D.4040202@wasp.net.au>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
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.gnu.org/pipermail/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: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Hi,

I just found the problem related to the -kernel-kqemu bug with win2k and 
'-m 256'. But fixing the bug is another matter !

Fabrice.

Brad Campbell wrote:
> Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 04:01:34PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>
>>> Jim C. Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>> -kernel-kqemu virtualizes ring 0 code.
>>>>
>>>> So it basically makes qemu do what VMware does.
>>>>
>>>> IIRC someone reported a 33% speedup with the new option.
>>>>  
>>>
>>> That was me.  That was a 33% speedup on win2k startup time.  kqemu 
>>> (user only) has a negligible impact on win2k startup time which 
>>> suggests this is mostly ring 0 code running which would make it a 
>>> good benchmark for kernel-kqemu performance.
>>>
>>> This was a terribly unscientific benchmarking so don't read too much 
>>> into it.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Anthony Liguori
>>
>>
>> My win2k guest (with SP4, but not any updates) seemed to hang on startup
>> with -kernel-kqemu.
> 
> 
> Are you using -m 256 by any chance? I get this result with around that 
> much ram allocated to the guest. -m 160 (or less) or -m 384 (or more) 
> works perfectly here..