From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38509) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W4JEb-0007he-Ba for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:54:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W4JEV-0001uL-C7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:53:57 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59406) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W4JEV-0001u8-2n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:53:51 -0500 Message-ID: <52D9C2F4.5040708@redhat.com> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 00:55:32 +0100 From: Max Reitz MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1389968119-24771-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> <1389968119-24771-28-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1389968119-24771-28-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 27/29] qemu-io: New command 'sleep' List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, pl@kamp.de, xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com, stefanha@redhat.com On 17.01.2014 15:15, Kevin Wolf wrote: > There is no easy way to check that a request correctly waits for a > different request. With a sleep command we can at least approximate it. > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf > --- > qemu-io-cmds.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/qemu-io-cmds.c b/qemu-io-cmds.c > index 85e4982..978a3a0 100644 > --- a/qemu-io-cmds.c > +++ b/qemu-io-cmds.c > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > #include "block/block_int.h" > #include "block/qapi.h" > #include "qemu/main-loop.h" > +#include "qemu/timer.h" > > #define CMD_NOFILE_OK 0x01 > > @@ -2038,6 +2039,46 @@ static const cmdinfo_t abort_cmd = { > .oneline = "simulate a program crash using abort(3)", > }; > > +static void sleep_cb(void *opaque) > +{ > + bool *expired = opaque; > + *expired = true; > +} > + > +static int sleep_f(BlockDriverState *bs, int argc, char **argv) > +{ > + char *endptr; > + long ms; > + struct QEMUTimer *timer; > + bool expired = false; > + > + ms = strtol(argv[1], &endptr, 0); > + if (ms < 0 || *endptr != '\0') { > + printf("%s is not a valid number\n", argv[1]); > + return 0; > + } > + > + timer = timer_new_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_HOST, sleep_cb, &expired); > + timer_mod(timer, qemu_clock_get_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_HOST) + SCALE_MS * ms); > + > + while (!expired) { I don't know whether compilers don't optimize accesses to variables whose addresses have been given to other functions, but shouldn't expired be marked volatile just to be sure? Max > + main_loop_wait(false); > + } > + > + timer_free(timer); > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static const cmdinfo_t sleep_cmd = { > + .name = "sleep", > + .argmin = 1, > + .argmax = 1, > + .cfunc = sleep_f, > + .flags = CMD_NOFILE_OK, > + .oneline = "waits for the given value in milliseconds", > +}; > + > static void help_oneline(const char *cmd, const cmdinfo_t *ct) > { > if (cmd) { > @@ -2151,4 +2192,5 @@ static void __attribute((constructor)) init_qemuio_commands(void) > qemuio_add_command(&resume_cmd); > qemuio_add_command(&wait_break_cmd); > qemuio_add_command(&abort_cmd); > + qemuio_add_command(&sleep_cmd); > }