On Mon, 8 Apr 2013 17:13:11 -0300
Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 04:36:58PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > ... and call it if defined from CPUClass.realize() if CPU was hotplugged
> >
> > by default leave .resume() unset (i.e. NULL) and override it for softmmu
> > in qemu_init_vcpu() if it's still unset.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
> [...]
> > diff --git a/cpus.c b/cpus.c
> > index 9b9a32f..6b793c5 100644
> > --- a/cpus.c
> > +++ b/cpus.c
> > @@ -973,6 +973,13 @@ void pause_all_vcpus(void)
> [...]
> > @@ -1042,7 +1047,11 @@ void qemu_init_vcpu(void *_env)
> > {
> > CPUArchState *env = _env;
> > CPUState *cpu = ENV_GET_CPU(env);
> > + CPUClass *klass = CPU_GET_CLASS(cpu);
> >
> > + if (klass->resume == NULL) {
> > + klass->resume = resume_vcpu;
> > + }
>
> So you are initializing a field of CPUClass struct inside a CPU object
> initialization function. And that's a function that is not even
> converted to QOM yet, and buried inside a non-trivial function call tree
> (hence easy to be called at the wrong time if one day we reorder the
> initialization steps).
init step are not likely to change this drastically but main reason why
it's here see below.
>
> Can't we do this on class_init(), where it belongs? If we need different
> implementations for softmmu/user, we can add a stub for *-user. I think
> even an explicit #ifdef inside resume_vcpu() would be preferable to
> this.
Generally I agree with you that class_init() would be more correct, but
ifdefs in qom/cpu.c defeat purpose to build qom/cpu.c only once for all
targets, that Andreas are working towards.
It asks surely asks for resume_vcpu() stub in libqemustubs, and I'd do it
there weren't objections to it.
Paolo,
it looks like a good candidate for libqemustubs, would it be ok to add stub
there?
>
>
> > cpu->nr_cores = smp_cores;
> > cpu->nr_threads = smp_threads;
> > cpu->stopped = true;
> [...]
>
