On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Artyom Tarasenko <atar4q...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Can it be that qemu (-system-sparc in my case, but I guess it's more > or less similar on all platforms) reacts to irqs slower than a real > hardware due to tcg optimizations? > > I see one test pattern which fails on qemu: > > <cause an interrupt> > nop * N > <check whether the interrupt happened> > > What I observe is that the proper interrupt does take a place, but > after the check, so no-one expects it anymore. > Is there a way to reduce the interrupt latency? Or maybe there is a > good substitute to a nop*N, so that irq would definitely get through > in the mean time?
On Sparc, nops do not generate any code at all.
