From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45558)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Ttj56-0007tP-MK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:11:56 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Ttj54-0002mF-Ju
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:11:52 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:54348)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1Ttj54-0002m9-Bv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2013 13:11:50 -0500
Message-ID: <50F055D8.7040505@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:11:36 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] getting rid of coroutine-gthread?
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: Brad <brad@comstyle.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>

Brad and Peter,

as far as I know OpenBSD and Linux/ARM were the main users of
coroutine-gthread.  Do you think we could dump it and rely on
coroutine-sigaltstack only?  The differences in signal handling of the
gthread implementation always worried me.

What versions of OpenBSD would we have to drop support for?  Is that
acceptable to you?

Paolo