From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:56855) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rvnzc-0006RD-VN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:46:18 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RvnzX-0002XX-Bf for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:46:16 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30586) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RvnzX-0002XQ-2K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:46:11 -0500 Message-ID: <4F34F567.3040309@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:45:59 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <201202100026.40727.paul@codesourcery.com> <4F34CF5E.9080106@redhat.com> <201202100952.26104.paul@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <201202100952.26104.paul@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-6; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 6/6] qemu_calculate_timeout: increase minimum timeout to 1h List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paul Brook Cc: avi@redhat.com, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefano Stabellini On 02/10/2012 10:52 AM, Paul Brook wrote: >> > At least the floppy DMA engine is fine with it, it uses idle bottom >> > halves (which are a hack and could be replaced by timers, but that's not >> > relevant now). > I thought idle bottom halves were one of the things that made this timout > necessary. How else are they going to get run? The timeout is reduced to 10 ms when an idle bottom half is scheduled. See qemu_bh_update_timeout in async.c. Paolo