From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48233 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ole3t-0001EY-J3
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 04:31:54 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Ole3s-0005ZZ-8S
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 04:31:53 -0400
Received: from mail-qw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:52305)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1Ole3s-0005ZT-2I
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 04:31:52 -0400
Received: by qwh5 with SMTP id 5so233129qwh.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:31:51 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4C6B9A73.90903@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:31:47 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4C62825A.6000903@mail.berlios.de>	<AANLkTinXC8r+13q5y9K+mvyNZPNbvycRq8p4FU5T+J1K@mail.gmail.com>	<4C685F5D.2090707@codemonkey.ws>	<AANLkTimr4qwxTJx0kD2-QXKp3dFdMi28Ypf5YEK2DdaY@mail.gmail.com>	<4C69A29F.5000606@codemonkey.ws>	<AANLkTimpGt3v8Qk5SfCHAWznDaGeMnpbwhtBnC3Sq=ZP@mail.gmail.com>
	<4C6AE96C.2040907@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4C6AE96C.2040907@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Unmaintained QEMU builds
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.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: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On 08/17/2010 09:56 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> If Paolo's Win32 threads get merged, would there be other reasons
>> against continuing Win32 support?
>
> I think a better question would be, should we even bother with thread
> wrappers? If we drop win32 support, we can just assume pthreads and
> avoid a layer of indirection.

Yes, we would.  qemu_thread_create ensures the newly-created thread 
won't receive any signals, for example.

Some day the wrappers could even start using futexes directly if there 
were a reason to do so.

> I disagree. There are quite a lot more patches and features written for
> these systems than Win32. With the exception of Darwin, at least the
> other Unices are close enough to Linux that the work to support them is
> relatively small.

Darwin is as close to Linux as FreeBSD is (and very close to FreeBSD, in 
turn).

> Considering that we're well over half a million lines of code today, I
> think we would do ourselves a favor by dropping some of the dead
> features we're carrying.

I agree, for example savevm/loadvm support for embedded boards is likely 
one of these features.  Right now I see no reason to declare Win32 a 
failure, though this may change in the future.

Paolo