Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] qom: detect bad reentrance during object_class_foreach

[Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>]

On 12/20/2013 10:29 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 19.12.2013 12:38, schrieb Alexey Kardashevskiy:
>> On 12/16/2013 08:23 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>> Am 04.12.2013 06:51, schrieb Peter Crosthwaite:
>>>> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>> From: Hervé Poussineau <hpoussin@reactos.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> We should not modify the type hash table while it is being iterated on.
>>>>> Assert that it does not happen.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hervé Poussineau <hpoussin@reactos.org>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  qom/object.c | 4 ++++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/qom/object.c b/qom/object.c
>>>>> index 3a43186..1dee9f0 100644
>>>>> --- a/qom/object.c
>>>>> +++ b/qom/object.c
>>>>> @@ -78,8 +78,10 @@ static GHashTable *type_table_get(void)
>>>>>      return type_table;
>>>>>  }
>>>>>
>>>>> +static bool enumerating = false;
>>>>
>>>> Global variable could probably use a more descriptive name.
>>>
>>> I renamed it to enumerating_types and dropped the assignment as
>>> suggested elsewhere by Alexey (a reply here would've been nice!).
>>
>> Whose reply? To what? :)
> 
> A reply of yours to Peter C.'s change request, stating that you have
> addressed it - and in this case in which series. :)

You lost me here. I got these patches from Paolo Bonzini and I was told to
repost them together with my other patches, that's it :)


>>> I also took the liberty of inserted a white line to make the function
>>> better readable.
>>
>> I do not mind, this was not my stuff :)
>>
>> What I wonder about is what is going to happen to the rest of what I
>> posted? Should I wait till this qom-next gets merged to upstream and repost
>> my patches for Alex Graf again? Thanks.
> 
> I do intend to post a pull before Chistmas, reviewing+applying the last
> no_user patch from Markus was one key ingredient for that.
> 
> Not sure which rest exactly you're referring to? I need to review your
> latest QemuOpts proposal among others. Actually I have a whole A4 page
> written down with series I'm wading through. ;)


I posted the "[PATCH v4 0/8] spapr: bootindex support" series which
included the 2 patches you mentioned in this series, from the rest - 3 are
for spapr and 3 are platform independent.



-- 
Alexey