From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47823)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1WVkry-0006vg-Ew
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 12:52:11 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1WVkrp-0005rN-E6
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 12:52:02 -0400
Received: from mail-qc0-x22f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22f]:58077)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1WVkrp-0005r0-Ag
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 12:51:53 -0400
Received: by mail-qc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id e16so2137468qcx.6
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 09:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <533D91A3.6020802@twiddle.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 09:51:47 -0700
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1396543508-12280-1-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org>
	<1396543508-12280-3-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <1396543508-12280-3-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.0? 2/2] cpu-exec: Unlock tb_lock if
 we longjmp out of code generation
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>, patches@linaro.org, "Andrei E. Warkentin" <andrey.warkentin@gmail.com>

On 04/03/2014 09:45 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> +            if (have_tb_lock) {
> +                spin_unlock(&tcg_ctx.tb_ctx.tb_lock);
> +            }

It ought not matter, since we ought to exit the loop on the next round, but i
have a strong preference for resetting have_tb_lock here.

Otherwise, this is nicely self-contained.


r~