From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59088)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1Tcbc9-0006G5-GF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 07:47:14 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1Tcbc8-0003A6-JH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 07:47:13 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33852)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1Tcbc8-0003A2-Bl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 07:47:12 -0500
Message-ID: <50B2134C.7000906@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 14:47:08 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <509627A2.3040509@web.de> <5096C044.7060504@redhat.com>
	<50975C27.5010906@web.de> <509774ED.6040104@redhat.com>
	<50977E1A.1070105@siemens.com> <5097B203.30207@redhat.com>
	<5097B302.3080203@siemens.com> <50B1F093.80901@redhat.com>
	<50B1F6B0.9040005@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <50B1F6B0.9040005@web.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] memory: Reintroduce dirty flag to optimize
 changes on disabled regions
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: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On 11/25/2012 12:45 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-11-25 11:18, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 11/05/2012 02:37 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As I noted, init and destroy cannot cause a topology update.
>>>
>>> Ah, right. Why are we wrapping them in transaction_begin/commit at all then?
>>>
>> 
>> We aren't.
>> 
>> 
>> void memory_region_destroy(MemoryRegion *mr)
>> {
>>     assert(QTAILQ_EMPTY(&mr->subregions));
>>     assert(memory_region_transaction_depth == 0);
>> 
> 
> We were talking about address_space_init/destroy.

This is to force a re-rendering of the address space, so that listeners
see the construction/destruction.  Simply assigning as->root wouldn't do
that.

This kind of reliance on side effects should be documented with a
comment (and forbidden to anything that is outside the implementation).
 My bad.

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