|
From: | Umesh Deshpande |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v4 2/5] ramlist mutex |
Date: | Fri, 19 Aug 2011 02:20:33 -0400 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Thunderbird/3.1.11 |
On 08/17/2011 02:28 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Or, is it okay to convert all the ramblock list traversals in exec.c (under iothread) to mru traversals, and probably it makes sense as the original list was also maintained in the mru order, whereas the sequence of blocks doesn't matter for the migration code. This way we don't have to acquire the mutex for block list traversals.On 08/16/2011 08:56 PM, Umesh Deshpande wrote:@@ -3001,8 +3016,10 @@ void qemu_ram_free_from_ptr(ram_addr_t addr) QLIST_FOREACH(block,&ram_list.blocks, next) { if (addr == block->offset) { + qemu_mutex_lock_ramlist(); QLIST_REMOVE(block, next); QLIST_REMOVE(block, next_mru); + qemu_mutex_unlock_ramlist(); qemu_free(block); return; } @@ -3015,8 +3032,10 @@ void qemu_ram_free(ram_addr_t addr) QLIST_FOREACH(block,&ram_list.blocks, next) { if (addr == block->offset) { + qemu_mutex_lock_ramlist(); QLIST_REMOVE(block, next); QLIST_REMOVE(block, next_mru); + qemu_mutex_unlock_ramlist(); if (block->flags& RAM_PREALLOC_MASK) { ; } else if (mem_path) {You must protect the whole QLIST_FOREACH. Otherwise looks good.
- Umesh
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |