From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55691)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <serge.fdrv@gmail.com>) id 1ayK8a-0006cz-91
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 May 2016 10:20:26 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <serge.fdrv@gmail.com>) id 1ayK8O-0002TB-O5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 May 2016 10:20:14 -0400
Received: from mail-lf0-x231.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::231]:36497)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <serge.fdrv@gmail.com>) id 1ayK8N-0002Jb-EB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 May 2016 10:20:08 -0400
Received: by mail-lf0-x231.google.com with SMTP id u64so97998386lff.3
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 05 May 2016 07:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
References: <1459870344-16773-1-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org>
	<1459870344-16773-5-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org>
From: Sergey Fedorov <serge.fdrv@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <572B5684.1030001@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 17:19:48 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1459870344-16773-5-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC v2 04/11] tcg: comment on which functions
 have to be called with tb_lock held
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: =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= <alex.bennee@linaro.org>, mttcg@listserver.greensocs.com, fred.konrad@greensocs.com, a.rigo@virtualopensystems.com, cota@braap.org
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mark.burton@greensocs.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, rth@twiddle.net, peter.maydell@linaro.org, claudio.fontana@huawei.com, Peter Crosthwaite <crosthwaite.peter@gmail.com>, =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=c3=a4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>

On 05/04/16 18:32, Alex Bennée wrote:
> diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c
> index f46e596..17f390e 100644
> --- a/exec.c
> +++ b/exec.c
> @@ -826,6 +826,7 @@ int cpu_breakpoint_insert(CPUState *cpu, vaddr pc, int flags,
>  {
>      CPUBreakpoint *bp;
>  
> +    /* TODO: locking (RCU?) */
>      bp = g_malloc(sizeof(*bp));
>  
>      bp->pc = pc;

This comment is a little inconsistent. We should make access to
breakpoint and watchpoint lists to be thread-safe in all the functions
using them. So if we note this, it should be noted in all such places.
Also, it's probably not a good idea to put such comment just above
g_malloc() invocation, it could be a bit confusing. A bit more details
would also be nice.

Kind regards,
Sergey