From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MVil3-0001gI-5h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:14:05 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MViky-0001dx-JI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:14:04 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38012 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MViky-0001dt-GL for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:14:00 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:56085) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MViky-0001sr-0v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:14:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4A6EC26A.4070306@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:18:34 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4A6EA5B3.6090500@web.de> In-Reply-To: <4A6EA5B3.6090500@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: qemu_cond_wait polling List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: qemu-devel , kvm-devel On 07/28/2009 10:16 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Hi, > > why do we wait on condition variables with silly timeouts (both in > upstream as in qemu-kvm)? There used to be some qemu_aio_poll in > qemu-kvm, but it's no longer there, and upstream never had (unless I > missed something). Is this polling legacy now? Remove it? > > Given that all uses are inside while loops, the timeouts are ignored. It's completely pointless now. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function