From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LwwCv-00014l-Rv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 06:31:05 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LwwCr-00011s-JV
	for Qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 06:31:05 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33391 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LwwCr-00011A-53
	for Qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 06:31:01 -0400
Received: from lizzard.sbs.de ([194.138.37.39]:15522)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>) id 1LwwCi-0003Iq-Hk
	for Qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Apr 2009 06:30:53 -0400
Message-ID: <49F0430A.8010300@siemens.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 12:29:30 +0200
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: Question about KVM and PC speaker
References: <49EF69BC.90300@gmx.de>
	<49F01C8D.1010203@web.de>	<20090423083252.GB5277@const.bordeaux.inria.fr>	<49F031C2.5000204@siemens.com>	<20090423092546.GF5277@const.bordeaux.inria.fr>
	<49F035E7.5080906@siemens.com> <49F03A00.8060502@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <49F03A00.8060502@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>, Qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Simon Bienlein <s.bienlein@gmx.de>

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Huh, it is! Then the problem is a KVM-only thing: The kernel part hooks
>> onto those resources but doesn't communicate changes to this user space
>> backend.
>>   
> 
> In this case, the -no-kvm-pit option should help.

Probably fine in many cases (where the PIT is no longer used anyway),
just a bit unintuitive for users.

I wonder why KVM moved port 0x61 handling into kernel space at all. By
leaving it in pcspk hands and extending the latter to sync with the
in-kernel PIT on sample generation, this speaker regression (of
kvm-userspace) should have been avoidable.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux