On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 05:00:20PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > On 06/29/11 16:29, Alon Levy wrote: > >On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 03:09:36PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>>+ case QXL_IO_DESTROY_ALL_SURFACES_ASYNC: + d->mode = > >>>QXL_MODE_UNDEFINED; > >> > >>Should go to the async thread. > > > >doesn't it make more sense to do all state changes from the vcpu > >thread? async thread can run much later, if you have a > >QXL_IO_DESTROY_ALL_SURFACES_ASYNC followed by a > >QXL_IO_CREATE_PRIMARY_ASYNC where the driver did not wait for the > >completion of the ASYNC first, I would still like to support that, > >but it won't work if I move this to the async thread. > > I think we should disallow doing any I/O ops while one is in > progress (except maybe QXL_IO_LOG). Most I/O commands are I/O > commands because they either needed for device setup or must be > synchronous anyway. > > QXL_IO_CREATE_PRIMARY_ASYNC wasn't exactly clever designed I think. > Would have been better to enter native mode with another I/O > command, then send the create request for the primary through the > rings like all other surface commands. But given it is a rare event > it isn't that a big issue either. >
So - leave or change? I prefer to leave.. Maybe add a "pending async" flag to catch such occasions? > cheers, > Gerd > >
