On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 10:22:43 +0800 Wenchao Xia <[email protected]> wrote:
> δΊ 2013-8-29 22:16, Luiz Capitulino ει: > > On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 20:38:12 +0800 > > Wenchao Xia <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> This series make auto completion and help functions works normal for sub > >> command, by using reentrant functions. In order to do that, global > >> variables > >> are not directly used in those functions any more. With this series, > >> cmd_table > >> is a member of structure Monitor so it is possible to create a monitor with > >> different command table now, auto completion will work in that monitor. In > >> short, "info" is not treated as a special case now, this series ensure help > >> and auto complete function works normal for any sub command added in the > >> future. > >> > >> Patch 5 replaced cur_mon with rs->mon, it is safe because: > >> monitor_init() calls readline_init() which initialize mon->rs, result is > >> mon->rs->mon == mon. Then qemu_chr_add_handlers() is called, which make > >> monitor_read() function take *mon as its opaque. Later, when user input, > >> monitor_read() is called, where cur_mon is set to *mon by "cur_mon = > >> opaque". > >> If qemu's monitors run in one thread, then later in readline_handle_byte() > >> and readline_comletion(), cur_mon is actually equal to rs->mon, in another > >> word, it points to the monitor instance, so it is safe to replace *cur_mon > >> in those functions. > >> > >> Thanks for Luiz and Eric for reviewing. > > > > Applied to the qmp branch, thanks. > > > > Btw, I'm assuming that the patches that contain Eric's reviewed-by didn't > > change since he reviewed them. Personally, I don't think it's right to carry > > reviewed-bys when the patch changes, even if it's something small or > > obvious. > > > I remember that the "Reviewed-by" were removed on all changed > patches, except: > Patches of V7 have typo issues which were pointed > out by Eric with "Reviewed-by", for those I fixed the typo and kept the > "Reviewed by". > Some patches were not modified but the line number may change, > since previous patch may have inserted new lines. For those I didn't > remove "Reviewed-by". > If the above is not appropriate, I'll avoid it. Looks fine to me.
