On 23 February 2013 10:03, Peter Maydell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 22 February 2013 21:15, Paul Brook <[email protected]> wrote: >>> @@ -100,6 +102,7 @@ struct CPUState { >>> bool stop; >>> bool stopped; >>> volatile sig_atomic_t exit_request; >>> + volatile sig_atomic_t tcg_exit_req; >> >> Do we really need annother variable/check? It seems like this should be at >> least partially redundant with the existing icount code. I have a simialr >> patch to that effect. > > I wanted to keep the code simple and easy to review for correctness > and obvious non-interaction with other features.
Also the icount check code does comparatively complicated operations on the icount which would be awkward to make atomic or otherwise safe against a signal handler or other thread coming in and changing something. -- PMM
