On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 5:56 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 17/04/2017 20:55, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>>> +/* ARM does not have a user-space readble cycle counter available.
>>>> + * This is a compromise to get monotonically increasing time.
>>>> + */
>>>> +static inline int64_t cpu_get_host_ticks(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return get_clock();
>>>> +}
>>> This doesn't look like it should be ARM-specific. Is it
>>> better than the current default implementation? If so,
>>> why not make this the default implementation?
>>
>> I think we can do that...
>
> Yes, it is always better for emulation accuracy. It may be much slower,
> depending on your OS (especially if get_clock requires a
> user->kernel->user transition), but the current code is quite broken.
>
OK, I sent an updated patch using get_clock() for all other cases.
--
Pranith
