Am 05.10.2022 um 23:11 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben: > Il mer 5 ott 2022, 06:32 Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> ha scritto: > > > Hm... blkdebug_debug_event() is called from bdrv_debug_event(), which is > > not coroutine_fn. And I think that it's not coroutine_fn is correct: > > For example, with 'qemu-img snapshot -c' you get img_snapshot() -> > > bdrv_snapshot_create() -> qcow2_snapshot_create() -> > > qcow2_alloc_clusters() -> BLKDBG_EVENT. I'm sure many other calls in > > qcow2 can be reached from non-coroutine context as well. > > > > It almost looks like your code analysis didn't consider calls through > > function pointers? > > > > No, that is not what happened. Rather it's that the analysis goes the > other way round: because SUSPEND rules call qemu_coroutine_yield(), > clang wants all the callers to be coroutine_fn too.
Ah, ok, makes sense. So checking the callers is indeed something that requires manual review. > It is technically incorrect that bdrv_debug_events sometimes are > placed outside coroutine context, and QEMU would crash if those events > were associated with a suspend rule. Yes, looks like a bug. As long as it's only in blkdebug, we can probably live with it (the easiest fix would probably be generating coroutine wrappers for bdrv_debug_event(), too). > I guess I (or you) can just drop this patch? Yes, I can do that. Kevin
