On 10/07/2015 17:34, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 10/07/2015 17:32, Frederic Konrad wrote:
I think something like that can work because we don't have two
flush_queued_work at the same time on the same CPU?
Yes, this works; there is only one consumer.
Holding locks within a callback can be very painful, especially if there
is a chance that the callback will take a very coarse lock such as big
QEMU lock. It can cause AB-BA deadlocks.
Paolo
Ok fine I'll change that.
Fred
static void flush_queued_work(CPUState *cpu)
{
struct qemu_work_item *wi;
if (cpu->queued_work_first == NULL) {
return;
}
qemu_mutex_lock(&cpu->work_mutex);
while ((wi = cpu->queued_work_first)) {
cpu->queued_work_first = wi->next;
qemu_mutex_unlock(&cpu->work_mutex);
wi->func(wi->data);
qemu_mutex_lock(&cpu->work_mutex);
wi->done = true;
if (wi->free) {
g_free(wi);
}
}
cpu->queued_work_last = NULL;
qemu_mutex_unlock(&cpu->work_mutex);
qemu_cond_broadcast(&qemu_work_cond);
}
