From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Lk0qw-0001ah-M4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:50:58 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Lk0qr-0001W5-NW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:50:58 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37307 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Lk0qr-0001W0-KM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:50:53 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:37972)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1Lk0qp-000316-Tb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:50:52 -0400
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:47:19 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 1/2] qemu: sem/thread helpers
Message-ID: <20090318184719.GA20319@amt.cnet>
References: <20090311161645.344003675@localhost.localdomain>
	<20090311161942.482576079@localhost.localdomain>
	<200903111648.02530.paul@codesourcery.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200903111648.02530.paul@codesourcery.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 04:48:01PM +0000, Paul Brook wrote:
> > +int qemu_sem_init(QemuSem *sem);
> > +int qemu_sem_lock(QemuSem *sem);
> 
> Please don't introduce yet annother set of locking routines.

I don't see any mutexes around? Or do you mean the wrappers around
pthread mutexes/threads are bad? I assume it might be useful for the
Windows port.