From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51334) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1Gdu-0001Rw-8T for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:21:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1Gdr-0008P0-3i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:21:54 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55740) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f1Gdq-0008Oj-Rd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:21:51 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 16:21:48 -0300 From: Eduardo Habkost Message-ID: <20180328192148.GR5046@localhost.localdomain> References: <1520860275-101576-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1520860275-101576-4-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <20180323212508.GF28161@localhost.localdomain> <20180327170541.295fc29a@redhat.com> <20180328134835.04f95535@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180328134835.04f95535@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 3/9] cli: add -preconfig option List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, pkrempa@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 01:48:35PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 17:05:41 +0200 > Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 18:25:08 -0300 > > Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 02:11:09PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > [...] > [...] > > > > @@ -1886,6 +1895,13 @@ static bool main_loop_should_exit(void) > > > > RunState r; > > > > ShutdownCause request; > > > > > > > > + if (preconfig_exit_requested) { > > > > + if (runstate_check(RUN_STATE_PRECONFIG)) { > > > > > > Is it possible to have preconfig_exit_request set outside of > > > RUN_STATE_PRECONFIG? When and why? > > preconfig_exit_requested is initialized with TRUE and > > in combo with '-inmigrate' we need this runstate check. > > it's the same as it was with > > { RUN_STATE_PRELAUNCH, RUN_STATE_INMIGRATE }, > > which I probably should remove (I need to check it though) > [...] > > > > > @@ -4594,6 +4623,10 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp) > > > > } > > > > parse_numa_opts(current_machine); > > > > > > > > + /* do monitor/qmp handling at preconfig state if requested */ > > > > + main_loop(); > > > > > > Wouldn't it be simpler to do "if (!preconfig) { main_loop(); }" > > > instead of entering main_loop() just to exit immediately? > > The thought didn't cross my mind, it might work and more readable > > as one doesn't have to jump into main_loop() to find out that > > it would exit immediately. > > I'll try to it on respin. > Well doing as suggested end ups more messy: > > @@static bool main_loop_should_exit(void) > ... > if (preconfig_exit_requested) { > runstate_set(RUN_STATE_PRELAUNCH); > return true; > } > > @@main > /* do monitor/qmp handling at preconfig state if requested */ > if (!preconfig_exit_requested) { > main_loop(); > } else if (runstate_check(RUN_STATE_PRECONFIG)) { > runstate_set(RUN_STATE_PRELAUNCH); > } This doesn't make sense to me. Why would we enter RUN_STATE_PRECONFIG state if -preconfig is not used at all? > preconfig_exit_requested = false; > ... > > I'd prefer original v4 approach, where only main_loop_should_exit() > has to deal with state transitions and book-keeping. If the above is unavoidable, I agree. But I still don't understand we have to enter PRECONFIG state if the user didn't specify -preconfig. -- Eduardo