From: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@linaro.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] coroutine: Break inclusion loop
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2022 18:23:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <010eaba5-8d35-7f45-0962-84f3284951c6@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABgObfZ4_8MzP4HP1JNjKb=C0qTXY3zHK=zK+=pYBt3hSYjiGQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 13/12/22 01:34, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 12/8/22 15:23, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > qemu/coroutine.h and qemu/lockable.h include each other. Neither
> > header actually needs the other one.
>
> qemu/lockable.h wants qemu/coroutine.h because of the reference to
> qemu_co_mutex_lock/unlock in the QEMU_MAKE_LOCKABLE macro. Said
> reference only happens when the macro is used, so strictly speaking
> only code that uses of qemu/lockable.h's functionality needs to
> include qemu/coroutine.h. The order doesn't matter.
[*]
> qemu/coroutine.h similarly wants qemu/lockable.h only for a macro: it
> uses QemuLockable for the prototype of qemu_co_queue_wait_impl, but
> QemuLockable is defined in qemu/typedefs.h. On the other hand, the
> qemu_co_queue_wait macro needs QEMU_MAKE_LOCKABLE. Again, the order
> does not matter but callers of qemu_co_queue_wait appreciate it if
> both files are included.
>
> So, this is why the inclusion loop works. This patch makes some
> files include qemu/coroutine.h even if they only need qemu/lockable.h
> for QEMU_LOCK_GUARD of a "regular" QemuMutex; for example, linux-user/
> does not use coroutines, so I'd like to avoid that it includes
> qemu/coroutine.h.
>
> One way is to just keep the cycle. Another is to break the cycle is
> as follows:
>
> 1) qemu/coroutine.h keeps including qemu/lockable.h
>
> 2) qemu/lockable.h is modified as follows to omit the reference to
> CoMutex:
>
> diff --git a/include/qemu/lockable.h b/include/qemu/lockable.h
> index 86db7cb04c9c..db59656538a4 100644
> --- a/include/qemu/lockable.h
> +++ b/include/qemu/lockable.h
> @@ -71,9 +71,11 @@ qemu_null_lockable(void *x)
> void *: qemu_null_lockable(x),
> \
> QemuMutex *: qemu_make_lockable(x, QML_OBJ_(x,
> mutex)), \
> QemuRecMutex *: qemu_make_lockable(x, QML_OBJ_(x,
> rec_mutex)), \
> - CoMutex *: qemu_make_lockable(x, QML_OBJ_(x,
> co_mutex)), \
> + QEMU_MAKE_CO_MUTEX_LOCKABLE(x)
> \
Interesting, I ended doing something similar today because this line is
the single sysemu-specific part of this file (user emulation shouldn't
have access to qemu/coroutine.h). So back to [*], the order seems to
matter for user-mode.
> QemuSpin *: qemu_make_lockable(x, QML_OBJ_(x, spin)))
>
> +#define QEMU_MAKE_CO_MUTEX_LOCKABLE(x)
> +
> /**
> * QEMU_MAKE_LOCKABLE_NONNULL - Make a polymorphic QemuLockable
> *
>
> 3) the following hack is added in qemu/coroutine.h, right after
> including qemu/lockable.h:
>
> #undef QEMU_MAKE_CO_MUTEX_LOCKABLE(x)
> #define QEMU_MAKE_CO_MUTEX_LOCKABLE(x) \
> CoMutex *: qemu_make_lockable(x, QML_OBJ_(x, co_mutex)),
>
>
> Neither is particularly pretty, so I vote for leaving things as is with
> a comment above the two #include directives.
>
> Paolo
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-17 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-08 14:23 [PATCH 0/4] coroutine: Clean up includes Markus Armbruster
2022-12-08 14:23 ` [PATCH 1/4] coroutine: Clean up superfluous inclusion of qemu/coroutine.h Markus Armbruster
2022-12-08 14:59 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2022-12-08 17:56 ` Markus Armbruster
2022-12-08 14:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] coroutine: Move coroutine_fn to qemu/osdep.h, trim includes Markus Armbruster
2022-12-08 15:03 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2022-12-08 14:23 ` [PATCH 3/4] coroutine: Clean up superfluous inclusion of qemu/lockable.h Markus Armbruster
2022-12-08 15:05 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2022-12-08 14:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] coroutine: Break inclusion loop Markus Armbruster
2022-12-08 15:07 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
[not found] ` <2ac0daae-da25-0a31-9a73-8f186cc510e9@redhat.com>
2022-12-13 0:34 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-12-15 6:49 ` Markus Armbruster
2022-12-17 12:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-12-19 4:23 ` Markus Armbruster
2022-12-17 17:23 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=010eaba5-8d35-7f45-0962-84f3284951c6@linaro.org \
--to=philmd@linaro.org \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).