On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 13:18, Emilio G. Cota <c...@braap.org> wrote: > > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 23:36:18 +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > > So is this: > > (a) a TSan false positive, because we've analysed the use > > of this struct field and know it's not a race because > > [details], but which we're choosing to silence in this way > > (b) an actual race for which the correct fix is to make the > > accesses atomic because [details] > > > > ? > > It is (b), as shown in the per-cpu lock series. In particular, > see these two patches: > - [PATCH v9 33/74] cpu: define cpu_interrupt_request helpers > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-05/msg06322.html > - [PATCH v9 39/74] arm: convert to cpu_interrupt_request > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2020-05/msg06328.html > > Since a more thorough fix is included in that other series, I think this > patch should be dropped from this series -- I'll post a reply to patch > 00/19 with more details.
I agree, we will re-focus the patch series a bit and drop this patch from the series. Thanks & Regards, -Rob > Thanks, > > Emilio