Thursday, August 25, 2005 11:23 AM Francois Rioux wrote:
What I'm trying to achieve is to write a file from a guest OS to a host.
In this case both are Windows OS.
I use the user network command line options since I looking for a no
install on host, portable solution.
I've tried various build
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 19:23 -0700, Francois Rioux wrote:
> I don't understand why this doesn't work. Is it Windows preventing the
> write is the exchange this a limitation in QEMU or in SLiRP? As I
> understand it SLiRP translates some tcp headers and acts as a firewall
> preventing incoming call
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 07:23:11PM -0700, Francois Rioux wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What I manage to do with a certain success is to map network shares of the
> host in the guest (net use z: 10.0.2.2\MyShare in the guest). I can browse
> and read files from the mapped drive. However I can't write to it
Hi,
What I'm trying to achieve is to write a file from a guest OS to a host. In this case both are Windows OS.
I use the user network command line options since I looking for a no install on host, portable solution.
I've tried various build in solutions: -tftp (read-only), and -smb (not supp
Paul Brook wrote:
> Contrary to popular belief the "const" qualifier on pointers has
> absolutely no effect on optimization. It's simply a debugging aid so
> the compiler will generate an error if you accidentally assign to
> it.
That's only true when the "const" applies to pointer targets, as in:
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 02:41:44PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > Probably more important is to make sure none constant data structures
> > are done on the stack. There is no good reason why any code page
> > should be read-write.
>
> Huh? this is nonsense.
I stand corrected, I ment to say on
On Wednesday 24 August 2005 15:38, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 02:41:44PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > > Probably more important is to make sure none constant data structures
> > > are done on the stack. There is no good reason why any code page
> > > should be read-write
Fortunately, it does make a difference.
PIO is polling-base, whereas DMA is, lacking a better term (excuse my
English), transaction-based. Since no CPU arbitration is needed, quite
a few optimizations can be done because of this, like real, large
block transfers. And if you happen to search the li
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 24, 2005 at 02:41:44PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> > Probably more important is to make sure none constant data structures
> > are done on the stack. There is no good reason why any code page
> > should be read-write.
>
> Huh? this is nonsense.
Uhoh, I seem to have managed to sti
> Probably more important is to make sure none constant data structures
> are done on the stack. There is no good reason why any code page
> should be read-write.
Huh? this is nonsense.
You have three segements in an application (ignoring dynamic heap allocated
memory):
The RO segment that con
My own experience is the effect of these types of optimizations is
usually negligible, although it is still the first thing I do when
optimizing a program. The main improvement I find is reducing the
time required to initialize variables and improved code readability.
If you know values are const
Víctor Córcoles López wrote:
Hello developers. My English is not good.
I see that DMA in Hard Disks in guest OS Windows 2000/XP/2003 is not
avalaible, it run in PIO mode.
How can activate UDMA mode for hard disk ?
I don't think you'd get any advantage of activating DMA inside the qemu
gues
12 matches
Mail list logo
