From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58799 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OgcHP-0003q8-0F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2010 07:37:03 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1OgcHN-0003sB-To
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2010 07:37:02 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46126)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1OgcHN-0003rz-L7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2010 07:37:01 -0400
Message-ID: <4C5950D4.90300@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 14:36:52 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Anyone seeing huge slowdown launching qemu with
	Linux 2.6.35?
References: <4C5858B2.9090801@redhat.com> <4C585F5B.5070502@codemonkey.ws>
	<4C58635B.7020407@redhat.com> <20100803190525.GB16570@redhat.com>
	<4C586AB9.5040302@codemonkey.ws> <4C586CF9.7030206@redhat.com>
	<20100803220628.GC28523@amd.home.annexia.org>
	<4C59009B.1050500@redhat.com>
	<20100804092428.GD28523@amd.home.annexia.org>
	<4C593857.9040602@redhat.com>
	<20100804113318.GE28523@amd.home.annexia.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100804113318.GE28523@amd.home.annexia.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

  On 08/04/2010 02:33 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> I'm only allocating 500MB of RAM, so there's easily enough space to
> put a large ROM, with tons of room for growth (of both RAM and ROM).
> Yes, even real hardware has done this.  The Weitek math copro mapped
> itself in at physical memory addresses c0000000 (a 32 MB window IIRC).

I'm sure it will work for your use case, but it becomes a feature that 
only works if you have a guest with a small amount of memory and few pci 
devices.  With a larger guest it fails.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.