On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote:
> On 2013-08-13 05:15, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>> If slirp needs to emulate tcp timeout, then the timeout value
>> for mainloop should be more precise, which is determined by
>> slirp's fasttimo or slowtimo.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan <pingf...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> main-loop.c | 2 +-
>> slirp/slirp.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/main-loop.c b/main-loop.c
>> index a44fff6..04120d2 100644
>> --- a/main-loop.c
>> +++ b/main-loop.c
>> @@ -458,8 +458,8 @@ int main_loop_wait(int nonblocking)
>> g_array_set_size(gpollfds, 0); /* reset for new iteration */
>> /* XXX: separate device handlers from system ones */
>> #ifdef CONFIG_SLIRP
>> - slirp_update_timeout(&timeout);
>> slirp_pollfds_fill(gpollfds);
>> + slirp_update_timeout(&timeout);
>
> Why this reordering?
>
In order to give timeout more precise value, which is based on the
result of fasttimo or slowtimo after slirp_pollfds_fill()
>> #endif
>> qemu_iohandler_fill(gpollfds);
>> ret = os_host_main_loop_wait(timeout);
>> diff --git a/slirp/slirp.c b/slirp/slirp.c
>> index 1deaad9..af66006 100644
>> --- a/slirp/slirp.c
>> +++ b/slirp/slirp.c
>> @@ -262,9 +262,27 @@ void slirp_cleanup(Slirp *slirp)
>>
>> void slirp_update_timeout(uint32_t *timeout)
>> {
>> + Slirp *slirp;
>> +
>> if (!QTAILQ_EMPTY(&slirp_instances)) {
>
> if (QTAILQ_EMPTY(&slirp_instances) || *timeout <= TIMEOUT_FAST) {
> return;
> }
>
> *timeout = MIN(1000, *timeout);
> ...
>
> would be nicer.
>
Ok.
>> *timeout = MIN(1000, *timeout);
>> }
>> + if (*timeout <= TIMEOUT_FAST) {
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* If we have tcp timeout with slirp, then we will fill @timeout with
>> + * more precise value.
>> + */
>> + QTAILQ_FOREACH(slirp, &slirp_instances, entry) {
>> + if (slirp->time_fasttimo) {
>> + *timeout = TIMEOUT_FAST;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + if (slirp->do_slowtimo) {
>> + *timeout = MIN(TIMEOUT_SLOW, *timeout);
>> + }
>> + }
>
> Not sure if the compiler is smart enough, but I would suggest to keep
> timeout local until returning and only write it back by then.
>
Ok, got it.
Thx,
Pingfan
