| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Deferrable Timer
|
To: |
"Dave Winchell" <dwinchell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Deferrable Timer |
|
From: |
"Yu, Ke" <ke.yu@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:37:44 +0800 |
|
Cc: |
"Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Wei, Gang" <gang.wei@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Fri, 18 Jul 2008 07:38:08 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<487F53D1.6030104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<1104166E0B63A341805FDB977862AAD201BC154A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C4A5047C.24127%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1104166E0B63A341805FDB977862AAD201BF479B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <487F53D1.6030104@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
Thread-index: |
AcjoFtP3IzO8/ePhRhOLMwOqffIR1AAyP63w |
|
Thread-topic: |
[Xen-devel] [PATCH] Deferrable Timer |
Dave,
Glad to see there is deferrable timer application. Please go ahead with
that. And I will keep you updated if there is finding in my side.
BTW, Could you please elaborate more on the "guest-handles-missed-tick"
case? Since there is no need to inject missed tick to guest, which timer
would be used as deferrable timer?
Best Regards
Ke
Dave Winchell wrote:
> Ke,
>
> One would think that hpet or vpt support for the
> guest-handles-missed-ticks policy would be a good application for a
> deferrable timer.
> If a deferrable timer were used, then the comparator (cmp) would have
> to
> be warped to a non-integer multiple of the period. This is because
> Linux reads the comparator register to estimate the delay since the
> interrupt
> was posted.
> I don't think warping like this will be a problem. At some point, I
> can test this.
>
> I think we could use the deferrable timer for the
> guest-does-not-handle-missed-ticks
> policy as well.
>
> Any investigation that you want to do in the platform timer area would
> be fine.
> Or I can do it, but that will probably be after I do the vpt.c/hpet.c
> integration
> work.
>
> thanks,
> Dave
>
>> Best Regards
>> Ke
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home