From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:48820) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UXs74-0007z4-Ep for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 07:55:51 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UXs73-0006XM-0G for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 07:55:50 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:42051 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UXs72-0006X4-Fn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 07:55:48 -0400 Message-ID: <51825442.8020907@suse.de> Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 13:55:46 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <50327DD8.8070205@siemens.com> <50333245.3060501@redhat.com> <51824BF9.4030205@siemens.com> In-Reply-To: <51824BF9.4030205@siemens.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Drop redundant resume_all_vcpus from main List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Anthony Liguori , qemu-devel Am 02.05.2013 13:20, schrieb Jan Kiszka: > On 2012-08-21 09:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Il 20/08/2012 20:11, Jan Kiszka ha scritto: >>> VCPUs are either resumed directly via vm_start, after the incoming >>> migration is done, or when a continue command is issued. We don't nee= d >>> the explicit resume before entering main_loop. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka >>> --- >>> >>> I was adding nesting support to pause/resume_all_vcpus, and that >>> stumbled over the imbalance below. >>> >>> vl.c | 1 - >>> 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/vl.c b/vl.c >>> index ebee867..231d3ab 100644 >>> --- a/vl.c >>> +++ b/vl.c >>> @@ -3757,7 +3757,6 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv, char **envp) >>> =20 >>> os_setup_post(); >>> =20 >>> - resume_all_vcpus(); >>> main_loop(); >>> bdrv_close_all(); >>> pause_all_vcpus(); >>> >> >> Makes sense. Do we need a "main loop and similar" tree, or can that >> tree be just uq/master now that qemu-kvm.c is dying? >=20 > Just noticed that this cleanup didn't make it into upstream back then. > Not truly trivial, but also not really risky. Since I happened to touch that CPU function just yesterday and Paolo and me seem to agree the call is superfluous, applying it to qom-cpu: https://github.com/afaerber/qemu-cpu/commits/qom-cpu Thanks, Andreas --=20 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=F6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=FCrnbe= rg