On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 11:49:40AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
[ sorry missed your message on Friday, replying now ]
> On 27/11/2015 09:12, Roman Kagan wrote:
> >> > +n = div64_u64(time_now - stimer->exp_time, stimer->count) + 1;
> >> > +stimer->exp_time += n * stimer->count;
> >
On 11/27/2015 01:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 27/11/2015 09:12, Roman Kagan wrote:
+ n = div64_u64(time_now - stimer->exp_time, stimer->count) + 1;
+ stimer->exp_time += n * stimer->count;
This is actually just a reminder calculation so I'd rather do it
directly with div64_u64
On 27/11/2015 09:12, Roman Kagan wrote:
>> > + n = div64_u64(time_now - stimer->exp_time, stimer->count) + 1;
>> > + stimer->exp_time += n * stimer->count;
> This is actually just a reminder calculation so I'd rather do it
> directly with div64_u64_rem().
It took me a while to understand why i
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 06:20:21PM +0300, Andrey Smetanin wrote:
> Per Hyper-V specification (and as required by Hyper-V-aware guests),
> SynIC provides 4 per-vCPU timers. Each timer is programmed via a pair
> of MSRs, and signals expiration by delivering a special format message
> to the configur
