Samuel Thibault, le Sat 02 Aug 2008 18:21:03 +0100, a écrit :
> 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_
what*
> 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
