From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:32850) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RLf2j-0003LW-Pr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:56:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RLf2i-0004DE-OF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:56:05 -0400 Received: from fe02x03-cgp.akado.ru ([77.232.31.165]:64983 helo=akado.ru) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RLf2i-0004Cm-BB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:56:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 21:55:57 +0400 (MSK) From: malc In-Reply-To: <4EB181C4.1090501@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <4EB1640F.2090604@adacore.com> <4EB1796B.7050901@adacore.com> <4EB181C4.1090501@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Multiple instances of Qemu on Windows multicore List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Fabien Chouteau On Wed, 2 Nov 2011, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 11/02/2011 06:16 PM, malc wrote: > > (mm)Timers have a possibility of running on a thread of their own which > > might be schedulled on the CPU different from the thread that runs > > emulated code, unchaining TBs and can (and will) fail in this case. > > This should not be a problem with dynticks+iothread (i.e. it should work or > not work equally). We now run just this basically when an alarm fires: > I was explaining rationale behind pinning stuff at the time it was done. > t->expired = t->pending = 1; > qemu_notify_event(); > > The rest is always done in the iothread. The iothread will then > suspend/resume the VCPU thread around the unchaining, so what matters is (in > Unix parlance) signal-safety of the unchaining, not thread-safety. > > Paolo > -- mailto:av1474@comtv.ru