From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GpxiT-0002Ho-AY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:01:29 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GpxiL-00026y-Vi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:01:25 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GpxiL-00026f-PX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:01:21 -0500 Received: from [66.249.92.174] (helo=ug-out-1314.google.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GpxiK-0005np-UN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 21:01:21 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j40so2040395ugd for ; Thu, 30 Nov 2006 18:01:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 18:01:19 -0800 From: "Ed Swierk" Sender: eswierk@gmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [Qemu-devel] OHCI for i386 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 Cc: James Lingard After spending some time trying to figure out why the emulated UHCI USB controller is so slow, I switched uhci_usb_init() in hw/pc.c to ohci_usb_init(). To my delight, Linux booted up and detected the controller on the first try, and accessing an emulated block device is 2 to 3 times faster. It seems that UHCI is used only on i386, while the other architectures use OHCI. Would switching i386 to OHCI cause problems for other guest OSes? --Ed