From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LltPL-0005eO-Vu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:18:16 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LltPG-0005Zf-U4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:18:15 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38767 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LltPG-0005ZY-Pr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:18:10 -0400
Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:9225)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1LltPG-0008Di-I1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:18:10 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31])
	by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1LltPF-0005vE-DY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:18:09 -0400
Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26])
	by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2NNI6pD012877
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:18:08 -0400
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:17:56 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch 1/7] qemu: mutex/thread/cond wrappers
Message-ID: <20090323231756.GA4626@amt.cnet>
References: <20090319145705.988576615@localhost.localdomain>
	<20090319150537.801001000@localhost.localdomain>
	<49C26BE9.4030905@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49C26BE9.4030905@redhat.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
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 05:59:37PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> +static void add_to_timespec(struct timespec *ts, unsigned int msecs)
>> +{
>> +    ts->tv_sec = ts->tv_sec + (long)(msecs / 1000);
>> +    ts->tv_nsec = (ts->tv_nsec + ((long)msecs % 1000) * 1000000);
>> +    if (ts->tv_nsec >= 1000000000) {
>> +        ts->tv_nsec -= 1000000000;
>> +        ts->tv_sec++;
>> +    }
>> +}
>>   
>
> timespec_add_msec()?  

> and why milliseconds?  

Well, its suitable for the current purposes. Any other suggestion?

> Also, maybe uint64_t is a  better type.

>> +
>> +int qemu_mutex_timedlock(QemuMutex *mutex, unsigned int msecs)
>> +{
>> +    struct timespec ts;
>> +
>> +    clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME, &ts);
>> +    add_to_timespec(&ts, msecs);
>> +
>> +    return pthread_mutex_timedlock(&mutex->lock, &ts);
>> +}
>>   
>
> I would have preferred a deadline instead of a timeout, but we'll see on  
> the next patches.

Please expand?

Fixed the other comments, thanks.