From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55067) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dSlXx-0003GV-LT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2017 10:44:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dSlXw-000496-Hq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2017 10:44:53 -0400 References: <20170704220346.29244-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <20170704220346.29244-9-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <4ffefaff-3c04-9328-a27b-332d30153b0a@redhat.com> <2079725542.47180593.1499264497487.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 16:44:36 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2079725542.47180593.1499264497487.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 08/35] block: all bdrv_aio callbacks are coroutine_fn List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?Q?Marc-Andr=c3=a9_Lureau?= Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Kevin Wolf , "open list:Block layer core" , Max Reitz On 05/07/2017 16:21, Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau wrote: >> >> They are, but it's an implementation detail. Why is this patch necess= ary? > I didn't think this would be controversial :) well, the checks I added = to clang verify function pointer share the coroutine attribute. >=20 > The function themself are/need to be coroutine_fn (as they will call co= routine_fn too) It's not controversial, I would not have expected the functions to call coroutine_fn. :) How do they do that? Paolo