On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 07:55:27PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote: > v2: > - add comment in patch 4 > - add another patch to comment why we need explicit aio_poll() in > iothread_run loop > > When I first read the iothread code, the gcontext confused me for > quite a while. Meanwhile, I've been tackling with some races due to > this complexity as well. How much we'll pay for creating the gcontext > unconditionally? Do we really need this flexibitily (or is it really > a flexibility after all)? I don't see much gain of existing code, but > I might be wrong. Anyway, I wrote this patchset to see how the list > would think about it. > > This series directly originates from previous discussion with > Marc-Andre where there's a slightly hacky way to try to acquire the > gcontext: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-02/msg05460.html > > Now with this series logically above patch is not needed any more. > Please read patch 4 for more information. > > And if this patchset can survive... how about running gcontext > directly in iothread_run()? I believe there could be a bit more > things to clean but I'll see. > > Make check passes for me. > > Comments welcomed. Thanks, > > Peter Xu (5): > iothread: replace init_done_cond with a semaphore > iothread: create the gcontext unconditionally > iothread: create main loop unconditionally > iothread: push gcontext earlier in the thread_fn > iothread: document about why we need explicit aio_poll() > > include/sysemu/iothread.h | 5 +-- > iothread.c | 91 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.17.1 >
I made the comment tweak discussed in this thread. Thanks, applied to my block tree: https://github.com/stefanha/qemu/commits/block Stefan
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
