Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-06 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Il 05/04/2012 14:30, malc ha scritto: >> > Would save that "* 1000". I just wondered why we do not use it elsewhere >> > in QEMU and was reluctant to risk some BSD breakage. >> > > It's probably worth mentioning that using anything other than > clock_gettime and CLOCK_MONOTONING (as well as setti

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-06 Thread Jan Kiszka
First user will be POSIX compat aio. Windows use cases aren't in sight, so this remains a POSIX-only service for now. Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka --- qemu-thread-posix.c | 23 +++ qemu-thread-posix.h |5 + 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread malc
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scritto: > > On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > >> Il 05/04/2012 14:30, malc ha scritto: > > Would save that "* 1000". I just wondered why we do not use it elsewhere > > in QEMU and was reluctant to risk s

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread malc
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-05 14:56, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scritto: > >> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> > >>> Il 05/04/2012 14:30, malc ha scritto: > >> Would save that "* 1000". I just wondered why we do not use it >

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread Jan Kiszka
On 2012-04-05 15:00, malc wrote: > On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 2012-04-05 14:56, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scritto: On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 05/04/2012 14:30, malc ha scritto: Would save that "* 1000". I just

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread malc
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-05 15:20, malc wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > >> On 2012-04-05 15:00, malc wrote: > >>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>> > On 2012-04-05 14:56, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scri

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread Jan Kiszka
On 2012-04-05 15:20, malc wrote: > On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 2012-04-05 15:00, malc wrote: >>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> On 2012-04-05 14:56, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scritto: >> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread malc
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-05 15:00, malc wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > >> On 2012-04-05 14:56, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >>> Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scritto: > On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > Il 05/04/2012 14:30, mal

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread Jan Kiszka
On 2012-04-05 14:56, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scritto: >> On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >>> Il 05/04/2012 14:30, malc ha scritto: >> Would save that "* 1000". I just wondered why we do not use it elsewhere >> in QEMU and was reluctant to risk some BS

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Il 05/04/2012 14:53, malc ha scritto: > On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> Il 05/04/2012 14:30, malc ha scritto: > Would save that "* 1000". I just wondered why we do not use it elsewhere > in QEMU and was reluctant to risk some BSD breakage. > >>> It's probably worth mentio

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread malc
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 05/04/2012 14:30, malc ha scritto: > >> > Would save that "* 1000". I just wondered why we do not use it elsewhere > >> > in QEMU and was reluctant to risk some BSD breakage. > >> > > > It's probably worth mentioning that using anything other than >

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread malc
On Thu, 5 Apr 2012, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-05 13:19, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 5 April 2012 11:59, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> +/* Returns true if condition was signals, false if timed out. */ > >> +bool qemu_cond_timedwait(QemuCond *cond, QemuMutex *mutex, > >> + uns

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread Peter Maydell
On 5 April 2012 12:56, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-05 13:19, Peter Maydell wrote: >> Use clock_gettime() and avoid the need to convert a struct timeval >> to a struct timespec ? > > Would save that "* 1000". I just wondered why we do not use it elsewhere > in QEMU and was reluctant to risk some

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread Jan Kiszka
On 2012-04-05 13:19, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 5 April 2012 11:59, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> +/* Returns true if condition was signals, false if timed out. */ >> +bool qemu_cond_timedwait(QemuCond *cond, QemuMutex *mutex, >> + unsigned int timeout_ms) >> +{ >> +struct timesp

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 01/10] Introduce qemu_cond_timedwait for POSIX

2012-04-05 Thread Peter Maydell
On 5 April 2012 11:59, Jan Kiszka wrote: > +/* Returns true if condition was signals, false if timed out. */ > +bool qemu_cond_timedwait(QemuCond *cond, QemuMutex *mutex, > +                         unsigned int timeout_ms) > +{ > +    struct timespec ts; > +    struct timeval tv; > +    int err;