On 2013-08-13 05:15, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
> If slirp needs to emulate tcp timeout, then the timeout value
> for mainloop should be more precise, which is determined by
> slirp's fasttimo or slowtimo.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan <pingf...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> main-loop.c | 2 +-
> slirp/slirp.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/main-loop.c b/main-loop.c
> index a44fff6..04120d2 100644
> --- a/main-loop.c
> +++ b/main-loop.c
> @@ -458,8 +458,8 @@ int main_loop_wait(int nonblocking)
> g_array_set_size(gpollfds, 0); /* reset for new iteration */
> /* XXX: separate device handlers from system ones */
> #ifdef CONFIG_SLIRP
> - slirp_update_timeout(&timeout);
> slirp_pollfds_fill(gpollfds);
> + slirp_update_timeout(&timeout);
Why this reordering?
> #endif
> qemu_iohandler_fill(gpollfds);
> ret = os_host_main_loop_wait(timeout);
> diff --git a/slirp/slirp.c b/slirp/slirp.c
> index 1deaad9..af66006 100644
> --- a/slirp/slirp.c
> +++ b/slirp/slirp.c
> @@ -262,9 +262,27 @@ void slirp_cleanup(Slirp *slirp)
>
> void slirp_update_timeout(uint32_t *timeout)
> {
> + Slirp *slirp;
> +
> if (!QTAILQ_EMPTY(&slirp_instances)) {
if (QTAILQ_EMPTY(&slirp_instances) || *timeout <= TIMEOUT_FAST) {
return;
}
*timeout = MIN(1000, *timeout);
...
would be nicer.
> *timeout = MIN(1000, *timeout);
> }
> + if (*timeout <= TIMEOUT_FAST) {
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /* If we have tcp timeout with slirp, then we will fill @timeout with
> + * more precise value.
> + */
> + QTAILQ_FOREACH(slirp, &slirp_instances, entry) {
> + if (slirp->time_fasttimo) {
> + *timeout = TIMEOUT_FAST;
> + break;
> + }
> + if (slirp->do_slowtimo) {
> + *timeout = MIN(TIMEOUT_SLOW, *timeout);
> + }
> + }
Not sure if the compiler is smart enough, but I would suggest to keep
timeout local until returning and only write it back by then.
Jan
> }
>
> void slirp_pollfds_fill(GArray *pollfds)
>
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
