Am 15.02.2018 um 10:27 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 04:31:45PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> > On 02/14/2018 08:06 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 10:01:06AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> > > I hope this explains things! The main issue that raised these questions
> > > was that aio_context_in_iothread() has a misleading name. Shall we
> > > rename it?
> >
> > Maybe, but that's a separate patch. What name would we bikeshed, maybe
> > aio_context_correct_thread() (we are the correct thread if we are the
> > iothread that owns ctx, or if we are the main thread and have properly
> > acquired ctx)
>
> Having acquired the AioContext does not make this function return true.
> The semantics are:
> 1. Current thread is the IOThread that runs the AioContext
> 2. Current thread is the main loop and the AioContext is the global
> AioContext.
>
> The function tests whether the current thread is the "native" or "home"
> thread for this AioContext. Perhaps we could also call it the "poller"
> thread because only that thread is allowed to call aio_poll(ctx, true).
>
> if (aio_context_in_native_thread(ctx)) {
> ...
> } else {
> ...
> }
>
> What do you think?"home" or "native" both work for me. Or if we want to keep the name short, maybe just changing the order and s/iothread/thread/ would be enough: bool in_aio_context_thread(AioContext *ctx) - do you think that would still be prone to misunderstandings? Kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
