Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 25/09/19 07:49, Sergio Lopez wrote: >>>> +serving as a stepping stone >>>> +for future projects aiming at improving boot times, reducing the >>>> +attack surface and slimming down QEMU's footprint. >>> >>> "Microvm also establishes a baseline for benchmarking QEMU and operating >>> systems, since it is optimized for both boot time and footprint". >> >> Well, I prefer my paragraph, but I'm good with either. > > You're right my version sort of missed the point. What about > s/benchmarking/benchmarking and optimizing/? > >>>> +The microvm machine type supports the following devices: >>>> + >>>> + - ISA bus >>>> + - i8259 PIC >>>> + - LAPIC (implicit if using KVM) >>>> + - IOAPIC (defaults to kernel_irqchip_split = true) >>>> + - i8254 PIT >>> >>> Do we need the PIT? And perhaps the PIC even? >> >> We need the PIT for non-KVM accel (if present with KVM and >> kernel_irqchip_split = off, it basically becomes a placeholder) > > Why? Perhaps I'm missing something. Is some other device supposed to be acting as a HW timer while running with TCG acceleration? >> and the >> PIC for both the PIT and the ISA serial port. > > Can't the ISA serial port work with the IOAPIC? Hm... I'm not sure. I wanted to give it a try, but then noticed that multiple places in the code (like hw/intc/apic.c:560) do expect to have an ISA PIC present through the isa_pic global variable. I guess we should be able to work around this, but I'm not sure if it's really worth it. What do you think? Thanks, Sergio.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
