On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/26/2012 03:56 PM, liu ping fan wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Il 25/07/2012 05:31, Liu Ping Fan ha scritto: >>>> From: Liu Ping Fan <pingfank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> rwlock: >>>> qemu_device_tree_mutex >>>> >>>> rd side: >>>> --device_del(destruction of device will be postphoned until unplug >>>> ack from guest), >>>> --pci hot-unplug >>>> --iteration (qdev_reset_all) >>>> >>>> wr side: >>>> --device_add >>>> >>> >>> This is not defined anywhere, is a piece missing in the patch? >>> >> Oh, yes, I miss the patch. In that patch, these rwlock are just place holder. >> I see there is already try to implement rwlock for qemu. >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-10/msg00192.html >> and is it the time for introduce rwlock for qemu? > > > From the description above, I don't see why it can't be a mutex. > Searching in the device tree (or MemoryRegion view) can be often in parallel, especially in mmio-dispatch code path Thanx, pingfan > -- > 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
