Am 12.05.2011 12:22, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> wrote: >> terAm 12.05.2011 11:54, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: >>> This patch speeds up coroutine creation by reusing freed coroutines. >>> When a coroutine terminates it is placed in the pool instead of having >>> its resources freed. The next time a coroutine is created it can be >>> taken straight from the pool and requires no initialization. >>> >>> Performance results on an Intel Core2 Duo T9400 (2.53GHz) for >>> ./check-coroutine --benchmark-lifecycle 20000000: >>> >>> No pooling: 19.5 sec >>> With pooling: 1.1 sec >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >>> --- >>> check-coroutine.c | 2 ++ >>> qemu-coroutine-int.h | 2 ++ >>> qemu-coroutine.c | 49 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >>> qemu-coroutine.h | 9 +++++++++ >>> vl.c | 2 ++ >>> 5 files changed, 61 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/check-coroutine.c b/check-coroutine.c >>> index 5a42c49..223c50c 100644 >>> --- a/check-coroutine.c >>> +++ b/check-coroutine.c >>> @@ -218,6 +218,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) >>> }; >>> int i; >>> >>> + qemu_coroutine_init(); >> >> Can we use module_init instead of adding an explicit call to main()? >> This would prevent forgetting to add it in qemu-img and qemu-io like in >> this patch. > > module_init what? :) qemu-img/qemu-io only init MODULE_INIT_BLOCK so > we'd have to modify them anyway.
Right... I was thinking of block, but in fact coroutines are not limited to the block layer, so we would abuse it. > I don't want to add qemu-img/qemu-io things yet because we don't have > a block layer user for coroutines yet. The qcow2 patches should > contain these changes. I hope we won't forget it. A missing atexit isn't a very obvious bug. Kevin
