On Thu 25 May 2017 06:32:16 PM CEST, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Another possibility is to use tg->lock, which we're holding anyway in
> both schedule_next_request and throttle_group_co_io_limits_intercept.
> This would require open-coding the CoQueue however, so I've chosen this
> alternative.
>
>
On Thu 18 May 2017 02:08:32 PM CEST, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Does io_limits_disabled need locking too?
>
> It uses atomic access since patch 3.
Ah, I overlooked that one, sorry!
Berto
On 18/05/2017 14:06, Alberto Garcia wrote:
> On Thu 11 May 2017 04:41:59 PM CEST, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> --- a/include/sysemu/block-backend.h
>> +++ b/include/sysemu/block-backend.h
>> @@ -72,11 +72,8 @@ typedef struct BlockDevOps {
>> * fields that must be public. This is in particular
On Thu 11 May 2017 04:41:59 PM CEST, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> --- a/include/sysemu/block-backend.h
> +++ b/include/sysemu/block-backend.h
> @@ -72,11 +72,8 @@ typedef struct BlockDevOps {
> * fields that must be public. This is in particular for QLIST_ENTRY() and
> * friends so that
