[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Correct alarm deadline computation
From: |
Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Correct alarm deadline computation |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Jan 2011 12:00:47 +0100 |
When the QEMU_CLOCK_HOST clock was added, computation of its
deadline was added to qemu_next_deadline, which is correct but
incomplete.
I noticed this while trying to make sense of the rules whereby
qemu_next_deadline_dyntick is computed, which miss QEMU_CLOCK_HOST
when use_icount is true. Looking at the history showed this to
be just an oversight, as the next patch shows clearly.
This patch inlines qemu_next_deadline into qemu_next_deadline_dyntick,
and corrects the logic so that only QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL is skipped for
use_icount == true.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
Cc: Jan Kiszka <address@hidden>
---
qemu-timer.c | 15 +++++++++++----
1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/qemu-timer.c b/qemu-timer.c
index db1ec49..174fd0c 100644
--- a/qemu-timer.c
+++ b/qemu-timer.c
@@ -724,11 +724,18 @@ static uint64_t qemu_next_deadline_dyntick(void)
int64_t delta;
int64_t rtdelta;
- if (use_icount)
+ if (!use_icount && active_timers[QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL]) {
+ delta = active_timers[QEMU_CLOCK_VIRTUAL]->expire_time -
+ qemu_get_clock(vm_clock);
+ } else {
delta = INT32_MAX;
- else
- delta = (qemu_next_deadline() + 999) / 1000;
-
+ }
+ if (active_timers[QEMU_CLOCK_HOST]) {
+ int64_t hdelta = active_timers[QEMU_CLOCK_HOST]->expire_time -
+ qemu_get_clock(host_clock);
+ if (hdelta < delta)
+ delta = hdelta;
+ }
if (active_timers[QEMU_CLOCK_REALTIME]) {
rtdelta = (active_timers[QEMU_CLOCK_REALTIME]->expire_time -
qemu_get_clock(rt_clock))*1000;
--
1.7.3.4
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Correct alarm deadline computation,
Paolo Bonzini <=