Re: [kvm-devel] [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/4] Rework alarm timer infrastrucure - take2

[Avi Kivity]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> Paul Brook wrote:
> > > Yes, good thinking, but this should only be done if it actually impacts
> > > something.  Reducing overhead from 0.1% to 0.05% is not worthwhile 
> > > if it
> > > introduces extra complexity.
> > >     
> >
> >
> > If the overhead is that small, why are we touching this code in the 
> > first place?
> >   
>
> Accuracy is much more important from my point of view.  Also, the 
> reduction in the number of signals delivered when the guest uses 100Hz 
> is significant.

You'd also get better battery life on laptops.


--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function