Anthony Liguori, le Sat 02 Aug 2008 09:46:30 -0500, a écrit : > Samuel Thibault wrote: > >Beth Kon, le Sat 02 Aug 2008 06:05:14 -0500, a écrit : > > > >>I was trying to reproduce the wakeup every 10ms that > >>Samuel Thibault mentioned, thinking the HPET would improve it. > >>But for an idle guest in both cases (with and without HPET), the > >>number of wakeups per second was relatively low (28). > >> > > > >I was referring to vl.c's timeout = 10; which makes the select call > >use a timeout of 10ms. That said, "/* If all cpus are halted then wait > >until the next IRQ */", so maybe that's why you get slower wakeups per > >second. I'm still surprised because of the call to qemu_mod_timer in > >pit_irq_timer_update which should setup at least a 100Hz timer with > >linux guests (when they don't have HPET available). > > > > The patch disables that when hpet is active.
That's why I would expect, indeed, but he is reporting that _without_ HPET he gets low wakeups per second already. Samuel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
