[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Anyone seeing huge slowdown launching qemu with Linux 2

From: Anthony Liguori
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Anyone seeing huge slowdown launching qemu with Linux 2.6.35?
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 13:26:35 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100713 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.6

On 08/03/2010 12:58 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
 On 08/03/2010 08:42 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
However, I don't think we can objectively differentiate between a "major" and "minor" user. Generally speaking, I would rather that we not take the position of "you are a minor user therefore we're not going to accommodate you".

Again it's a matter of practicalities. With have written virtio drivers for Windows and Linux, but not for FreeDOS or NetWare. To speed up Windows XP we have (in qemu-kvm) kvm-tpr-opt.c that is a gross breach of decency, would we go to the same lengths to speed up Haiku? I suggest that we would not.

tpr-opt optimizes a legitimate dependence on the x86 architecture that Windows has. While the implementation may be grossly indecent, it certainly fits the overall mission of what we're trying to do in qemu and kvm which is emulate an architecture.

You've invested a lot of time and effort into it because it's important to you (or more specifically, your employer). That's because Windows is important to you.

If someone as adept and commit as you was heavily invested in Haiku and was willing to implement something equivalent to tpr-opt and also willing to do all of the work of maintaining it, then reject such a patch would be a mistake.

If Richard is willing to do the work to make -kernel perform faster in such a way that it fits into the overall mission of what we're building, then I see no reason to reject it. The criteria for evaluating a patch should only depend on how it affects other areas of qemu and whether it impacts overall usability.

As a side note, we ought to do a better job of removing features that have created a burden on other areas of qemu that aren't actively being maintained. That's a different discussion though.


Anthony Liguori

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]