From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: qemu_cond_wait polling
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:18:34 +0300
Message-ID: <4A6EC26A.4070306@redhat.com>
References: <4A6EA5B3.6090500@web.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:56701 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750974AbZG1JN7 (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:13:59 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4A6EA5B3.6090500@web.de>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 07/28/2009 10:16 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> why do we wait on condition variables with silly timeouts (both in
> upstream as in qemu-kvm)? There used to be some qemu_aio_poll in
> qemu-kvm, but it's no longer there, and upstream never had (unless I
> missed something). Is this polling legacy now? Remove it?
>
>    

Given that all uses are inside while loops, the timeouts are ignored.  
It's completely pointless now.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function