On 15/12/2014 10:39, Zhang Haoyu wrote:
> Hi Paolo, Yang
> What's the status of this problem?
I will look at Yang's patch after the end of the merge window.
Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordo
Hi Paolo, Yang
What's the status of this problem?
Thanks,
Zhang Haoyu
On 2014-12-04 00:13:49, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
>On 28/11/2014 12:59, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
>>
>> According the feedback from Haoyu on my test patch which skipping the
>> interrupt injection if irq line is active (See another
On 28/11/2014 12:59, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
>
> According the feedback from Haoyu on my test patch which skipping the
> interrupt injection if irq line is active (See another thread), it seems
> QEMU does not follow the rule. But my patch is just a workaround. I
> guess we should have more though
>Hi all,
>On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 03:20:43PM +0800, Zhang Haoyu wrote:
I tested win-server-2008 with "-cpu
core2duo,hv_spinlocks=0x,hv_relaxed,hv_time",
this problem still happened, about 200,000 vmexits per-second,
bringing very bad experience, just like b
Hi all,
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 03:20:43PM +0800, Zhang Haoyu wrote:
>>> I tested win-server-2008 with "-cpu
>>> core2duo,hv_spinlocks=0x,hv_relaxed,hv_time",
>>> this problem still happened, about 200,000 vmexits per-second,
>>> bringing very bad experience, just like being s
I tested win-server-2008 with "-cpu
core2duo,hv_spinlocks=0x,hv_relaxed,hv_time",
this problem still happened, about 200,000 vmexits per-second,
bringing very bad experience, just like being stuck.
>>>
>>> Please upload a full trace somewhere, or at
>> I tested win-server-2008 with "-cpu
>> core2duo,hv_spinlocks=0x,hv_relaxed,hv_time",
>> this problem still happened, about 200,000 vmexits per-second,
>> bringing very bad experience, just like being stuck.
>
> Please upload a full trace somewhere, or at least the
On 25/11/2014 04:15, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> > The IRR register means an interrupt was received and not serviced yet,
> > similar to the LAPIC or PIC register. It is not the same thing as the
> > interrupt line level (it happens to be for level-triggered interrupts).
>
> Yes, but commit(0bc830b05
On 24/11/2014 13:17, Zhang Haoyu wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> If I press the one of "Insert/Delete/Home/End/PageUp/PageDown/UpArrow/
>> DownArrow/LeftArrow/RightArrow" key w/o releasing, then lots of interrupts
>> will be injected to vm(win7/win2008), about 8000/s, the system become very
>> slow,
>>
>Hi all,
>
>If I press the one of "Insert/Delete/Home/End/PageUp/PageDown/UpArrow/
>DownArrow/LeftArrow/RightArrow" key w/o releasing, then lots of interrupts
>will be injected to vm(win7/win2008), about 8000/s, the system become very
>slow,
>bringing very bad experience. But the other keys are ok
On 21/11/2014 15:20, Zhang, Yang Z wrote:
> Zhang Haoyu wrote on 2014-11-20:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> If I press the one of "Insert/Delete/Home/End/PageUp/PageDown/UpArrow/
>> DownArrow/LeftArrow/RightArrow" key w/o releasing, then lots of
>> interrupts will be injected to vm(win7/win2008), about 8000/s,
On 20/11/2014 03:20, Zhang Haoyu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> If I press the one of "Insert/Delete/Home/End/PageUp/PageDown/UpArrow/
> DownArrow/LeftArrow/RightArrow" key w/o releasing, then lots of interrupts
> will be injected to vm(win7/win2008), about 8000/s, the system become very
> slow,
> bringi
12 matches
Mail list logo
