From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60497 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PtiCc-0000kL-BX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:06:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PtiCb-0001uS-D7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:06:30 -0500 Received: from mail-ww0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:43148) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PtiCb-0001uL-7t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:06:29 -0500 Received: by wwb29 with SMTP id 29so956200wwb.4 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 07:06:28 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <4D6A6871.3070709@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 16:06:25 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1298734819-1960-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <1298734819-1960-8-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <4D6A1A7E.6040501@web.de> In-Reply-To: <4D6A1A7E.6040501@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v2 upstream 07/22] add assertions on the owner of a QemuMutex List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, aurelien@aurel32.net On 02/27/2011 10:33 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Now that we are left without any assertions, I start wondering about one > of the original missions: enforce qemu_cond_signal/broadcast to be > called under a mutex. What about extending those services with a mutex > argument and applying the assert there? That is one of the patches in my queue that I haven't submitted yet. :) Paolo