Hi
On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 12:52 PM Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Bin Meng <bin.m...@windriver.com>
>
> The maximum number of wait objects for win32 should be
> MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS, not MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS + 1.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bin.m...@windriver.com>
> ---
>
> Changes in v3:
> - move the check of adding the same HANDLE twice to a separete patch
>
> Changes in v2:
> - fix the logic in qemu_add_wait_object() to avoid adding
> the same HANDLE twice
>
> util/main-loop.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/util/main-loop.c b/util/main-loop.c
> index f00a25451b..cb018dc33c 100644
> --- a/util/main-loop.c
> +++ b/util/main-loop.c
> @@ -363,10 +363,10 @@ void qemu_del_polling_cb(PollingFunc *func, void
> *opaque)
> /* Wait objects support */
> typedef struct WaitObjects {
> int num;
> - int revents[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS + 1];
> - HANDLE events[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS + 1];
> - WaitObjectFunc *func[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS + 1];
> - void *opaque[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS + 1];
> + int revents[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS];
> + HANDLE events[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS];
> + WaitObjectFunc *func[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS];
> + void *opaque[MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS];
> } WaitObjects;
>
> static WaitObjects wait_objects = {0};
> @@ -395,6 +395,9 @@ void qemu_del_wait_object(HANDLE handle,
> WaitObjectFunc *func, void *opaque)
> if (w->events[i] == handle) {
> found = 1;
> }
> + if (i == MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS - 1) {
> + break;
> + }
>
hmm
> if (found) {
> w->events[i] = w->events[i + 1];
> w->func[i] = w->func[i + 1];
>
The way deletion works is by moving the i+1 element (which is always zeroed
for i == MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS) to i.
After your patch, for i == MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS, we no longer clear the
last value, and instead rely simply on updated w->num:
if (found) {
w->num--;
}
So your patch looks ok to me, but I prefer the current code.
Paolo, what do you say?
