From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Mw0VW-000083-TB
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:26:42 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Mw0VR-0008V0-MF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:26:42 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52163 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mw0VR-0008Uk-7i
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:26:37 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41212)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1Mw0VQ-0001a9-Nk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:26:37 -0400
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 23:24:21 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] Revert "posix-aio-compat: avoid
	signal race when spawning a thread"
Message-ID: <20091008212421.GA7229@redhat.com>
References: <20091007132006.GA9668@redhat.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0910072000090.2178@linmac.oyster.ru>
	<4ACCC1A5.5020306@codemonkey.ws> <20091007204421.GC4085@redhat.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0910080053350.4678@linmac.oyster.ru>
	<20091007205523.GA4783@redhat.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0910080059550.4776@linmac.oyster.ru>
	<20091008014742.GA15601@shareable.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0910080647510.2109@linmac.oyster.ru>
	<20091008151527.GB29691@shareable.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20091008151527.GB29691@shareable.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: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 04:15:27PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> malc wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > 
> > > malc wrote:
> > > > > 	The  use of sigprocmask() is unspecified in a
> > > > > 	multithreaded process; see pthread_sigmask(3).
> > > > > 
> > > > > Does it matter?
> > > > 
> > > > One of the patches i've asked you to try today replaced sigprocmask with
> > > > pthread_sigmask, you've said it did nothing. In any case, strictly
> > > > speaking, the code is wrong, so yes it does matter in theory.

BTW, tried looking at the code.
I saw some (unrelated) issues:

static void aio_signal_handler(int signum)
{
    if (posix_aio_state) {
        char byte = 0;

        write(posix_aio_state->wfd, &byte, sizeof(byte));
    }

    qemu_service_io();
}

And qemu_service_io does a *ton* of things.
Questions:
-  Do we need the call to qemu_service_io? Seems to
   behave the same with and without it.
-  Are all of the data structures touched by qemu_service_io
   protected by blocking signals before access?

Also:
	- let's use signalfd on linux, if available?
	- for SIGALARM, maybe timerfd?

Thanks,

-- 
MST