From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GvKuo-00081V-Q8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:48:26 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GvKun-0007zm-LY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:48:26 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GvKun-0007zb-43 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:48:25 -0500 Received: from [66.249.92.175] (helo=ug-out-1314.google.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GvKun-0005me-3V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:48:25 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j40so911836ugd for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2006 13:48:20 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <46d6db660612151348w542e05daq75e5c1eab6539cb6@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 22:48:18 +0100 From: "Christian MICHON" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Qemu speed vs vmplayer? In-Reply-To: <200612152138.58994.paul@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <10541fa50612130009s798a1587n4a3d2b8b51baa334@mail.gmail.com> <200612151613.35422.paul@codesourcery.com> <45831FB1.4030907@tidetamerboatlifts.com> <200612152138.58994.paul@codesourcery.com> 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 On 12/15/06, Paul Brook wrote: > > I've got a copy of today's CVS, > > You missed my point entirely. kqemu is a closed source module, there's > absolutely nothing we can do with it. > well, we can use kqemu at least, right? :) interesting benchmark: I started removing most of the graphics code (which I originally believed was slowing down qemu a lot) and started running through ssh on windows host + tap-win32 patch. Using kqemu, I see no improvement in calculations, meaning the graphical part (sdl) is not the main blocking point. Next on my list of trials is the disk/io (we did some pthread experiment in the past, I think we can get some more bandwith here). one last point: last time I used qvm86 for windows host, it did not give good results. Hanged OS, several reboots, qemu hanging forever. And back then I was using up to date qvm86 cvs. Is qvm86 still active ? If yes (for windows host), I'll try to do newer benchmarks. -- Christian