From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34098)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VEikL-00025C-Lq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:37:35 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VEikF-0005Xs-57
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:37:29 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30693)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1VEikE-0005Xe-RE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 12:37:23 -0400
Message-ID: <521E2737.1030108@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 18:37:11 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1377705768-21996-1-git-send-email-ncmike@ncultra.org>
In-Reply-To: <1377705768-21996-1-git-send-email-ncmike@ncultra.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] convert ram_list to RCU DQ
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: Mike Day <ncmike@ncultra.org>
Cc: Paul Mckenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mathew Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>

Il 28/08/2013 18:02, Mike Day ha scritto:
> @@ -1102,15 +1110,15 @@ void qemu_ram_set_idstr(ram_addr_t addr, const char *name, DeviceState *dev)
>      pstrcat(new_block->idstr, sizeof(new_block->idstr), name);
>  
>      /* This assumes the iothread lock is taken here too.  */
> -    qemu_mutex_lock_ramlist();
> -    QTAILQ_FOREACH(block, &ram_list.blocks, next) {
> +    rcu_read_lock();
> +    QLIST_FOREACH_RCU(block, &ram_list.blocks, next) {
>          if (block != new_block && !strcmp(block->idstr, new_block->idstr)) {
>              fprintf(stderr, "RAMBlock \"%s\" already registered, abort!\n",
>                      new_block->idstr);
>              abort();
>          }
>      }
> -    qemu_mutex_unlock_ramlist();
> +    rcu_read_unlock();

Forgot about this.  Every time you see "This assumes the iothread lock
is taken here too", you're in the write side so you do not need
lock/unlock and you do not need...

>      /* This assumes the iothread lock is taken here too.  */
>      qemu_mutex_lock_ramlist();
> -    QTAILQ_FOREACH(block, &ram_list.blocks, next) {
> +    QLIST_FOREACH_RCU(block, &ram_list.blocks, next) {
>          if (addr == block->offset) {
> -            QTAILQ_REMOVE(&ram_list.blocks, block, next);
> +            QLIST_REMOVE_RCU(block, next);
>              ram_list.mru_block = NULL;
>              ram_list.version++;
>              g_free(block);

qemu_mutex_lock_ramlist/qemu_mutex_unlock_ramlist either.

Otherwise, the patch is pretty solid!  Thanks,

Paolo