Am 17.08.2022 um 11:35 hat Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito geschrieben:
>
>
> Am 17/08/2022 um 10:46 schrieb Kevin Wolf:
> @@ -475,13 +477,15 @@ void *block_job_create(const char *job_id, const
> BlockJobDriver *driver,
> job->ready_notifier.notify = block_job_event_ready;
>
Am 17/08/2022 um 10:46 schrieb Kevin Wolf:
@@ -475,13 +477,15 @@ void *block_job_create(const char *job_id, const
BlockJobDriver *driver,
job->ready_notifier.notify = block_job_event_ready;
job->idle_notifier.notify = block_job_on_idle;
-notifier_li
Am 16.08.2022 um 16:54 hat Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito geschrieben:
> Am 04/08/2022 um 19:10 schrieb Kevin Wolf:
> > Am 25.07.2022 um 09:38 hat Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito geschrieben:
> >> Now that the API offers also _locked() functions, take advantage
> >> of it and give also the caller control to
Am 04/08/2022 um 19:10 schrieb Kevin Wolf:
> Am 25.07.2022 um 09:38 hat Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito geschrieben:
>> Now that the API offers also _locked() functions, take advantage
>> of it and give also the caller control to take the lock and call
>> _locked functions.
>>
>> This makes sense esp
Am 25.07.2022 um 09:38 hat Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito geschrieben:
> Now that the API offers also _locked() functions, take advantage
> of it and give also the caller control to take the lock and call
> _locked functions.
>
> This makes sense especially when we have for loops, because it
> makes n
On 7/25/22 10:38, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
Now that the API offers also _locked() functions, take advantage
of it and give also the caller control to take the lock and call
_locked functions.
This makes sense especially when we have for loops, because it
makes no sense to have:
for(job
Now that the API offers also _locked() functions, take advantage
of it and give also the caller control to take the lock and call
_locked functions.
This makes sense especially when we have for loops, because it
makes no sense to have:
for(job = job_next(); ...)
where each job_next() takes the l
