On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 01:24:43PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> At the 2016 summit it was suggested that we delete the GThread
> coroutine impl since it is not fully functional, and you can
> debug the ucontext impl with our GDB helper script.
>
> I don't recall the subject being raised
Stefan Hajnoczi writes:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 07:20:54AM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>
>> Richard Henderson writes:
>>
>> > On 04/28/2017 02:24 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> >> At the 2016 summit it was suggested that we delete the GThread
>> >>
On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 07:20:54AM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
>
> Richard Henderson writes:
>
> > On 04/28/2017 02:24 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >> At the 2016 summit it was suggested that we delete the GThread
> >> coroutine impl since it is not fully functional, and you
Richard Henderson writes:
> On 04/28/2017 02:24 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> At the 2016 summit it was suggested that we delete the GThread
>> coroutine impl since it is not fully functional, and you can
>> debug the ucontext impl with our GDB helper script.
>>
>> I don't
On 04/28/2017 02:24 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
At the 2016 summit it was suggested that we delete the GThread
coroutine impl since it is not fully functional, and you can
debug the ucontext impl with our GDB helper script.
I don't recall the subject being raised again since the summit
so
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 01:24:43PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> At the 2016 summit it was suggested that we delete the GThread
> coroutine impl since it is not fully functional, and you can
> debug the ucontext impl with our GDB helper script.
>
> I don't recall the subject being raised
At the 2016 summit it was suggested that we delete the GThread
coroutine impl since it is not fully functional, and you can
debug the ucontext impl with our GDB helper script.
I don't recall the subject being raised again since the summit
so here's a proposal to delete the GThread impl, as a way