[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option
From: |
Jan Kiszka |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option |
Date: |
Mon, 24 May 2010 22:11:11 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080226 SUSE/2.0.0.12-1.1 Thunderbird/2.0.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 |
Juan Quintela wrote:
>>> We already have to disable hpet for 5.4 (1 year ago). It was done with
>>> a local hack because it was supposed that for next big release it would
>>> have been fixed.
>> But this remains a RHEL issue. Redhat decided to compile out features
>> that are unsupported, others seem to handle this differently.
>
> And then, everybody has a different hack to disable the features that
> they don't need. Instead of doing a local hack, we do a patch that
> allows anyone to disable HPET if it sees fit.
So far I only know of precisely one user that wants to disable x86
platform devices at build-time.
>
>>> Here we are, and device is still not fixed, what to do? Another local
>>> patch? Just get upstream to integrate a sane way to disable it and let
>>> in enable by default?
>> Let's start with listing your requirements to no longer disable HPET.
>
> It is not stable at this point in time :-( Running with --no-hpet is
> better than without it in all our testing. If we have to ask/modify
> everything to use --no-hpet, we can also compile-out it.
>
>> That would already help us to asses how long !CONFIG_HPET would actually
>> be of any use at all. I'm yet optimistic that we can resolve most if not
>> all remaining concerns for 0.13 - and CONFIG_HPET would at best be 0.13
>> material anyway.
>
> At this very point in time:
> - it is not stable
Well, that is helpful.
> - lack irq-reinjection when missing ticks
That is more helpful.
I just reworked the RTC regarding this, I guess it will be
straightforward to address it in the HPET too.
>
> (I was not the one debugging/testing this so I don't have more details,
> but can ask for them). So, it is not stable enough yet.
HPET is a fairly small device, a few hundred lines of code, only a few
ugly platform dependencies, but that's it already. I bet it could have
been fixed by now if someone just started by the time the tests reported
"it is not stable enough".
Jan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/6] Move no_hpet declaration to hpet_emul.h, (continued)
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/6] Move no_hpet declaration to hpet_emul.h, Juan Quintela, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/6] Move no_hpet test to inside hpet_init(), Juan Quintela, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/6] Create CONFIG_HPET, Juan Quintela, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/6] Make hpet_in_legacy_mode() return 0 for !TARGET_I386, Juan Quintela, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/6] make hpet_in_legacy_mode() return a bool, Juan Quintela, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Juan Quintela, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Jan Kiszka, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Paul Brook, 2010/05/24
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Anthony Liguori, 2010/05/24
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Paul Brook, 2010/05/24
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Anthony Liguori, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Juan Quintela, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Anthony Liguori, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Jan Kiszka, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Blue Swirl, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Jan Kiszka, 2010/05/24
- [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option, Paolo Bonzini, 2010/05/25