On 07/21/2011 03:26 PM, Ferry Huberts wrote:
>> > +void memory_region_transaction_begin(void)
>> > +{
>> > + ++memory_region_transaction_depth;
>> > +}
>> > +
>>
>> wouldn't you rather keep it safe by doing either here
>>
>> if (!memory_region_transaction_depth)
>> memory_region_transaction_depth++;
>>
>
> Why? I want to allow nesting transactions (not that I anticipate such a
> case).
>
doesn't memory_region_update_topology commit all accumulated changes?
It does.
if
it does then memory_region_transaction_depth is left non-zero in the
nesting case while no more changes are actually present, resulting in
superfluous calls to memory_region_update_topology.
maybe I misunderstood memory_region_update_topology?
update_mapping()
{
m_r_t_begin();
// call memory API functions to change hierarchy
some_other_function() entered
m_r_t_begin();
// call more memory API functions to change hierarchy
m_r_t_commit(); // nothing happens
some_other_function() exits
// call even more memory API functions to change hierarchy
m_r_t_commit(); // all accumulated changes become visible
}
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
