On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 11:09:28AM +0200, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 5:52 AM Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:23:19AM +0200, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > terminal3270 is uses the front-end side of the chardev. It shouldn't > > > create sources from backend side context. Fwiw, send_timing_mark_cb > > > calls qemu_chr_fe_write_all() which should be thread safe. > > > > > > This partially reverts changes from commit > > > 2c716ba1506769c9be2caa02f0f6d6e7c00f4304. > > > > I don't fully understand too on why "It shouldn't create sources from > > backend side context". Could you explain a bit? > > A frontend shouldn't use a backend function, and doesn't have to use > the backend gmaincontext. > > > > > If you don't want the backend gcontext to be exposed to the frontend, > > IMHO the simplest thing is just to use the NULL gcontext in > > qemu_chr_timeout_add_ms() which is a one-liner change. I don't see > > much point on re-using the GSource tags since IMHO GSource pointer is > > always superior to the old tag system. > > Using the tag or the GSource * doesn't change much afaik.
I did some convertions in the past year to convert tag -> GSource and that shows some differences when we want non-default gcontexts... Otherwise I won't bother. :) > Not only > this is not a hot path, but glib gmain code does create the tag on > attach anyway. You may be marginally faster on remove/detach by > avoiding one lookup. > > (btw, I think both tag and GSource* are as old) I am not strong on this, but my rule is that if I don't have explicit reason to change a code I keep it there. Here I don't see an obvious reason to switch back to the tag things (not to mention that I still think GSource is better, always). Thanks, -- Peter Xu
