From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53810)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1S4dqV-0004IR-Qp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:45:25 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1S4dqQ-0008JX-Q5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:45:23 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:36663)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1S4dqQ-0008JF-Hp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:45:18 -0500
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 16:45:17 -0300
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20120305164517.4aace404@doriath.home>
In-Reply-To: <20120305185808.GE20937@garlic.tlv.redhat.com>
References: <1330956981-5001-1-git-send-email-alevy@redhat.com>
	<4F54CEA2.10808@codemonkey.ws> <4F54F5F8.70105@redhat.com>
	<4F54F76B.70403@codemonkey.ws>
	<20120305143142.1a1a53e2@doriath.home>
	<20120305180958.GC20937@garlic.tlv.redhat.com>
	<4F550350.7030703@redhat.com>
	<20120305185808.GE20937@garlic.tlv.redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] console: add hw_screen_dump_async
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Alon Levy <alevy@redhat.com>
Cc: kraxel@redhat.com, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 20:58:08 +0200
Alon Levy <alevy@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 08:17:52PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 03/05/2012 08:09 PM, Alon Levy wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 02:31:42PM -0300, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 11:27:07 -0600
> > > > Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On 03/05/2012 11:20 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > > > > On 03/05/2012 04:33 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> async in QEMU doesn't mean "generate a QMP event when you're done".
> > > > > >> It should mean execute this closure when you finish (function pointer
> > > > > >> + opaque).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The QMP event should be dispatched from the closure such that the
> > > > > >> screendump code doesn't have to have a direct dependency on QMP.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What about using the parallel execution facility of qmp?  It's silly to
> > > > > > duplicate every command X with X-async and X-COMPLETED.
> > >
> > > How would the parallel execution facility be opaque to the implementer?
> > > screendump returns, screendump_async needs to pass a closure. You can
> > > automatically generate any amount of code, but you can only have a
> > > single function implementation with longjmp/coroutine, or having a
> > > saparate thread per command but that would mean taking locks for
> > > anything not trivial, which avoids the no-change-to-implementation. Is
> > > this what you have in mind?
> > 
> > It would not be opaque to the implementer.  But it would avoid
> > introducing new commands and events, instead we have a unified mechanism
> > to signal completion.
> 
> Yeah, that sounds good. Let's have that for 6.4.

That's too far away, qemu will have be re-written a dozen of times when we
get there.

But if you meant 1.2, yes, I hope to have async support for 1.2. But I must
admit that I'm having some trouble delivering things on time...