From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GJEGo-0005A3-ET
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:01:38 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GJEGl-00057H-Df
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:01:36 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GJEGl-000577-At
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:01:35 -0400
Received: from [84.96.92.60] (helo=Smtp.neuf.fr)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GJEQf-0003O0-4u
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 15:11:49 -0400
Received: from [84.102.211.149] by sp604001mt.gpm.neuf.ld
	(Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-5.05 (built Feb 16 2006))
	with ESMTP id <0J4X00M6BGMTK281@sp604001mt.gpm.neuf.ld> for
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 20:56:54 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 20:57:20 +0200
From: Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: QEMU on dual core WinXP
In-reply-to: <ECDC9C7BC7809340842C0E7FCF48C393EFCCD8@MCHP7IEA.ww002.siemens.net>
Message-id: <44F88290.3040703@bellard.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <ECDC9C7BC7809340842C0E7FCF48C393EFCCD8@MCHP7IEA.ww002.siemens.net>
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

Schwarz, Konrad wrote:
>>Since version 0.8.2, QEMU includes the processor affinity 
>>fix. Did you try with this version ?
> 
> 
> No, I branched off at 0.8.0.  Is my assumtion correct that the problem
> lies in the way asynchronous events (interrupts) are signaled to the
> interpreter loop?

Yes, and it is not easy to solve...

Fabrice.