From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37885 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PDept-0005wp-L9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 11:01:14 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1PDepr-0002cI-GQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 11:01:13 -0400
Received: from mail-qw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:53823)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1PDepr-0002c5-EM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 11:01:11 -0400
Received: by qwf6 with SMTP id 6so147850qwf.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 08:01:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4CD17915.90104@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 10:00:37 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Delete IOHandlers after potentially running
	them
References: <1288794584-6099-1-git-send-email-stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <1288794584-6099-1-git-send-email-stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>

On 11/03/2010 09:29 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> Since commit 4bed9837309e58d208183f81d8344996744292cf an .fd_read()
> handler that deletes its IOHandler is exposed to .fd_write() being
> called on the deleted IOHandler.
>
> This patch fixes deletion so that .fd_read() and .fd_write() are never
> called on an IOHandler that is marked for deletion.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi<stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>   vl.c |   15 ++++++++-------
>   1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c
> index 7038952..6f56123 100644
> --- a/vl.c
> +++ b/vl.c
> @@ -1252,17 +1252,18 @@ void main_loop_wait(int nonblocking)
>           IOHandlerRecord *pioh;
>
>           QLIST_FOREACH_SAFE(ioh,&io_handlers, next, pioh) {
> -            if (ioh->deleted) {
> -                QLIST_REMOVE(ioh, next);
> -                qemu_free(ioh);
> -                continue;
> -            }
> -            if (ioh->fd_read&&  FD_ISSET(ioh->fd,&rfds)) {
> +            if (!ioh->deleted&&  ioh->fd_read&&  FD_ISSET(ioh->fd,&rfds)) {
>                   ioh->fd_read(ioh->opaque);
>               }
> -            if (ioh->fd_write&&  FD_ISSET(ioh->fd,&wfds)) {
> +            if (!ioh->deleted&&  ioh->fd_write&&  FD_ISSET(ioh->fd,&wfds)) {
>                   ioh->fd_write(ioh->opaque);
>               }
> +
> +            /* Do this last in case read/write handlers marked it for deletion */
> +            if (ioh->deleted) {
> +                QLIST_REMOVE(ioh, next);
> +                qemu_free(ioh);
> +            }
>    

Actually, on second thought, I think this is correct although I still 
think reverting is a better strategy.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>           }
>       }
>
>