Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] USB 2.0 EHCI emulation

2008-01-08 Thread Dor Laor
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 01:30 +, Paul Brook wrote: -The host kernel was configured with dynamic tick hi-res timers, to allow the desired timer resolution. USB 2.0 microframe is 125usec. It still works even without accurate timing demands. Only isochronous mode will have problems and it

RE: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] USB 2.0 EHCI emulation

2008-01-08 Thread Arnon Gilboa
? Arnon -Original Message- From: Paul Brook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 3:30 AM To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Arnon Gilboa; KVM; Roni Luxenberg Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] USB 2.0 EHCI emulation -The host kernel was configured with dynamic tick hi-res

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] USB 2.0 EHCI emulation

2008-01-08 Thread Paul Brook
On Tuesday 08 January 2008, Dor Laor wrote: On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 01:30 +, Paul Brook wrote: -The host kernel was configured with dynamic tick hi-res timers, to allow the desired timer resolution. USB 2.0 microframe is 125usec. It still works even without accurate timing demands.

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] USB 2.0 EHCI emulation

2008-01-08 Thread Avi Kivity
Paul Brook wrote: On Tuesday 08 January 2008, Dor Laor wrote: On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 01:30 +, Paul Brook wrote: -The host kernel was configured with dynamic tick hi-res timers, to allow the desired timer resolution. USB 2.0 microframe is 125usec. It still works even

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] USB 2.0 EHCI emulation

2008-01-07 Thread Paul Brook
-The host kernel was configured with dynamic tick hi-res timers, to allow the desired timer resolution. USB 2.0 microframe is 125usec. Requiring a 8kHz timer is a non-starter. The 100kHz retry timer is even more bogus. Qemu isn't capable of this kind of realtime response. You need to figure