From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ffquq-0002tk-S5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 May 2006 00:12:12 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ffqun-0002tD-QE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 May 2006 00:12:12 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ffqun-0002tA-L8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 May 2006 00:12:09 -0400
Received: from [32.97.110.152] (helo=e34.co.us.ibm.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1FfqxM-0003OW-BD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 16 May 2006 00:14:48 -0400
Received: from d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com
	[9.17.195.106])
	by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id
	k4G4C5fB015520
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 16 May 2006 00:12:05 -0400
Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168])
	by d03relay04.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.8) with ESMTP id
	k4G4C5rI174268
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 15 May 2006 22:12:05 -0600
Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.13.3) with ESMTP id
	k4G4C5Hi011238
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 15 May 2006 22:12:05 -0600
Received: from [9.49.222.191] ([9.49.222.191])
	by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id
	k4G4C4jJ011191
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 15 May 2006 22:12:04 -0600
Message-ID: <44695113.8040708@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 23:12:03 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] objective benchmark?
References: <200605152203.00826.mr@ramendik.ru>
In-Reply-To: <200605152203.00826.mr@ramendik.ru>
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: <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

Mikhail Ramendik wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As I have reported before, it seems that on my host linux system kqemu does 
> not work with guest win98se.
>
> Is there any benchmark that I could run in the guest, with and without kqemu, 
> to check if this is so objectively? (Ideally I'd like two benchmarks - 16-bit 
> and 32-bit code).
>   

The vast majority of guest benchmarking programs are going to give you 
invalid results.  The clock within QEMU (rdtsc and wall clock) are not 
very reliable and this is going to skew the results.

I suggest a benchmark that treats the guest as a server (something like 
specweb where the timing or thoroughput measurement is done on the host 
where time is reliable).

Regards,

Anthony Liguori