On 2012-03-22 13:52, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 01:41:18PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2012-03-22 08:18, Gleb Natapov wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 02:49:09PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> On 2012-03-21 14:41, Gleb Natapov wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 02:39:47PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>>> On 2012-03-21 14:36, Avi Kivity wrote: >>>>>>> On 03/21/2012 02:36 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>>>>> This is now implied by kvm_irqchip_in_kernel. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So we can't have -no-kvm-pit? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No huge loss, but unexpected. >>>>>> >>>>>> See e81dda195556e72f8cd294998296c1051aab30a8. >>>>>> >>>>> I am curious what is the reason for upstream to not supporting disabling the >>>>> in-kernel PIT separately? >>>> >>>> It was considered no longer relevant: >>>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.kvm.devel/85393 >>>> >>> Hmm, may be we should think about this some more. If in the (not so far) >>> future we want to drop pit emulation from the kernel we may want to support >>> -no-kvm-pit to allow migration from old kernels to new one. >> >> That's not an issue. Both device models are compatible, and you can >> migrate between kernel_irqchip=on/off theses days with QEMU. >> > Cool. Including PIT lost tick compensation? The feature is not yet available for the userspace PIT (we only support tick compensation for the userspace RTC - IIRC). Requires better IRQ injection feedback, you likely remember. ;) Also, I wonder if the kernel exports all tick-compensation related states for save/restore. Need to check again... Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
