On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 04:46:59PM +1000, Peter Crosthwaite wrote: > Hi Stefan, > > I have ccd you on a RFC containing the work that this patch uses. I have > also changed the name of the function to co_queue_enter_next() as i think > yield was not the appropriate name. The idea is the top level thread which > is managing the work queue can transfer into coroutine context with the > function, so this function is more of an "enter" function than a "yield" > function. I cant see any technical reasons why it needs the coroutine_fn > restriction, as this in not required by qemu_coroutine_enter, which is the > backend of this function.
You are right, I was confused by the "yield" in the name :). It doesn't need to be coroutine_fn. Stefan
