From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IMlQp-0003UK-G2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 10:07:07 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IMlQo-0003TL-1P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 10:07:07 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IMlQn-0003TI-SH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 10:07:05 -0400 Received: from il.qumranet.com ([82.166.9.18]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IMlQo-0002GF-0N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2007 10:07:06 -0400 Message-ID: <46C84E95.7070802@qumranet.com> Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 17:07:17 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [kvm-devel] [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/4] Rework alarm timer infrastrucure - take2 References: <20070817231149.544849769@gmail.com> <20070819131042.GA22798@mail.shareable.org> <46C84A16.7040305@qumranet.com> <200708191457.21237.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <200708191457.21237.paul@codesourcery.com> 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: Paul Brook Cc: kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Paul Brook wrote: >> Yes, good thinking, but this should only be done if it actually impacts >> something. Reducing overhead from 0.1% to 0.05% is not worthwhile if it >> introduces extra complexity. >> > > > If the overhead is that small, why are we touching this code in the first > place? > Accuracy is much more important from my point of view. Also, the reduction in the number of signals delivered when the guest uses 100Hz is significant. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function