From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52357) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UXsHC-0003Nl-Eg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 08:06:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UXsH7-0003dQ-MI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 08:06:18 -0400 Received: from thoth.sbs.de ([192.35.17.2]:20240) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UXsH7-0003by-7A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 08:06:13 -0400 Message-ID: <518256B1.7060008@siemens.com> Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 14:06:09 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <50327DD8.8070205@siemens.com> <50333245.3060501@redhat.com> <51824BF9.4030205@siemens.com> <51825442.8020907@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <51825442.8020907@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Drop redundant resume_all_vcpus from main List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Anthony Liguori , qemu-devel On 2013-05-02 13:55, Andreas F=E4rber wrote: > Am 02.05.2013 13:20, schrieb Jan Kiszka: >> On 2012-08-21 09:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> Il 20/08/2012 20:11, Jan Kiszka ha scritto: >>>> VCPUs are either resumed directly via vm_start, after the incoming >>>> migration is done, or when a continue command is issued. We don't ne= ed >>>> the explicit resume before entering main_loop. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka >>>> --- >>>> >>>> I was adding nesting support to pause/resume_all_vcpus, and that >>>> stumbled over the imbalance below. >>>> >>>> vl.c | 1 - >>>> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c >>>> index ebee867..231d3ab 100644 >>>> --- a/vl.c >>>> +++ b/vl.c >>>> @@ -3757,7 +3757,6 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp) >>>> =20 >>>> os_setup_post(); >>>> =20 >>>> - resume_all_vcpus(); >>>> main_loop(); >>>> bdrv_close_all(); >>>> pause_all_vcpus(); >>>> >>> >>> Makes sense. Do we need a "main loop and similar" tree, or can that >>> tree be just uq/master now that qemu-kvm.c is dying? >> >> Just noticed that this cleanup didn't make it into upstream back then. >> Not truly trivial, but also not really risky. >=20 > Since I happened to touch that CPU function just yesterday and Paolo an= d > me seem to agree the call is superfluous, applying it to qom-cpu: >=20 > https://github.com/afaerber/qemu-cpu/commits/qom-cpu Perfect! Jan --=20 Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux