qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 0/8] arm AioContext with its own timer stuff


From: Paolo Bonzini
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 0/8] arm AioContext with its own timer stuff
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 08:42:26 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7

Il 24/07/2013 03:28, liu ping fan ha scritto:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
>> > Il 23/07/2013 04:53, liu ping fan ha scritto:
>>> >> The scenior I can figure out is if adopting timeout of poll, then when
>>> >> changing the deadline, we need to invoke poll, and set the new
>>> >> timeout, right?
>> >
>> > Yes, you need to call aio_notify so that poll is reinvoked.
>> >
> I try to list the difference between alarm_timer and timeout of poll.
> It includes thread-affinity, resolution and easy-use.
> 
> Most of all,  thread-affinity
> The main issue with alarm timer is the affinity of timer_t with
> threads. For linux, SIGEV_THREAD_ID has been supported for a very long
> time and we already associate the signal with the specified thread. So
> the only issue is left for other unix, we can emulate the affinity by
> using SIGEV_THREAD and repost the event to the specified thread.
> As to timeout of poll, it has the affinity of threads.
> 
> Resolution:
> alarm_timer provides higher resolution, but do we care about it?

With ppoll, is this true or just hearsay?

(Without ppoll, indeed setitimer has 1 us resolution while poll has 1
ms; too bad that select has other problems, because select has also 1 us
resolution).

Paolo

> easy-use:
> The reset of the deadline as mentioned.
> 
> Finally, I admit timeout of poll will save large chunk of platform-related 
> code.




reply via email to

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