Avi Kivity wrote: > Paul Brook wrote: >> >>>> a new timer will be fired to try inject it again soon (==0.1msec) >>>> >> >> If the guest is missing interrupts, the chances of a 0.1ms interval >> working are not great. Most likely It's either going trigger >> immediately, or be delayed significantly and you're going to end up >> even further behind. > > If 0.1 ms is within qemu's timeslice, then qemu should get the wakeup > on time (assuming a host with high resolution timers). > >> If triggering immediately is OK then why not do that all the time? >> > > Triggering immediately doesn't help, the guest likely has interrupts > blocked processing the same interrupt. > >> If triggering immediately is not acceptable then you're still going >> to loose interrupts. >> > > You're still accounting for them, so if the load decreases eventually > it's going to catch up. > >
btw, the better solution here is to wait until the guest is ready for timer interrupt injection again, but that's not as easy as arming a timer. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
