From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:55796)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1R1bWS-0004ZP-G9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 06:07:53 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1R1bWR-00035Z-Dt
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 06:07:52 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50144)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1R1bWR-00035N-6E
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 06:07:51 -0400
Message-ID: <4E6893F1.8070004@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 13:07:45 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1315398653-29945-1-git-send-email-aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<4E67BB97.8070306@us.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E67BB97.8070306@us.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH -V2] iohandler: update qemu_fd_set_handler
 to work with null	call back arg
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: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 09/07/2011 09:44 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
> I think this is a bit more complicated than is really needed.  Here's 
> what I came up with which also fixes another bug where the io channel 
> could be freed twice.  I stumbled across this via a very strange 
> failure scenario.  Avi, it might be worth trying this patch to see if 
> it fixes your problem too.

Right now, I've got more than just one problem.

>
> One thing that I found challenging debugging this, coroutines make 
> valgrind very unhappy.  Is it possible that we could have a command 
> line switch to fall back to the thread based coroutines so to make 
> things more valgrind friendly?

How is valgrind even aware of coroutines?  Unless is doesn't implement 
makecontext correctly, it shouldn't even be aware of them.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function