On 2013-07-25 14:21, Alex Bligh wrote: > > > --On 25 July 2013 14:05:30 +0200 Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Alex Bligh's series gives each AioContext its own rt_clock. This avoids >> the need for synchronization in the simple case. If we require timer >> access between threads then we really need to synchronize. >> >> You pointed out in another email that vm_clock stops when the guest is >> paused. I think we can find a solution for I/O throttling and QED, >> which use vm_clock in the block layer. Note that block jobs already use >> rt_clock. > > I would happily at a QEMUClock of each type to AioContext. They are after > all pretty lightweight.
What's the point of adding tones of QEMUClock instances? Considering proper abstraction, how are they different for each AioContext? Will they run against different clock sources, start/stop at different times? If the answer is "they have different timer list", then fix this incorrect abstraction. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
