From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53708)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <fred.konrad@greensocs.com>) id 1ZOpYq-0008M1-NM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:04:29 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <fred.konrad@greensocs.com>) id 1ZOpYl-0001wS-Rm
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:04:28 -0400
Received: from greensocs.com ([193.104.36.180]:39416)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <fred.konrad@greensocs.com>) id 1ZOpYl-0001vi-Jb
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Aug 2015 12:04:23 -0400
Message-ID: <55C8CB83.1020608@greensocs.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 18:04:19 +0200
From: Frederic Konrad <fred.konrad@greensocs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1439220437-23957-1-git-send-email-fred.konrad@greensocs.com>
	<1439220437-23957-2-git-send-email-fred.konrad@greensocs.com>
	<55C8CA70.7090809@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <55C8CA70.7090809@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH V7 01/19] cpus: protect queued_work_*
	with work_mutex.
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mttcg@greensocs.com
Cc: mark.burton@greensocs.com, alex.bennee@linaro.org, a.rigo@virtualopensystems.com, guillaume.delbergue@greensocs.com

On 10/08/2015 17:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
> On 10/08/2015 17:26, fred.konrad@greensocs.com wrote:
>>   
>> +    qemu_mutex_lock(&cpu->work_mutex);
>>       while ((wi = cpu->queued_work_first)) {
>>           cpu->queued_work_first = wi->next;
>> +        qemu_mutex_unlock(&cpu->work_mutex);
>>           wi->func(wi->data);
>> +        qemu_mutex_lock(&cpu->work_mutex);
>>           wi->done = true;
> This should be atomic_mb_set

Isn't that protected by the mutex? Or maybe it's used somewhere else?
>
>>           if (wi->free) {
>>               g_free(wi);
>>           }
>>       }
>>       cpu->queued_work_last = NULL;
> ... and I'm a bit afraid of leaving the state of the list inconsistent,
> so I'd move this after the cpu->queued_work_first assignment.  Otherwise
> the patch looks good, I'm queuing it for 2.5.
>
> Paolo
>
>> +    qemu_mutex_unlock(&cpu->work_mutex);
>> +