On 04/05/2017 09:39, Fam Zheng wrote:
> On Thu, 04/20 14:00, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> + if (atomic_cmpxchg(&mutex->locked, waiters, waiters + 1) != waiters) {
>
> Is it still useful to try the fast path again if there are now even more
> waiters, i.e. "atomic_cmpxchg(...) > waiters"?
Probably not.
Paolo
>> + goto retry_fast_path;
>> + }
>> +
>> + qemu_co_mutex_lock_slowpath(ctx, mutex);
>> + qemu_co_mutex_unlock(mutex);
>> +}
>> +
>> void coroutine_fn qemu_co_mutex_unlock(CoMutex *mutex)
>> {
>> Coroutine *self = qemu_coroutine_self();
>> --
>> 2.9.3
>>
>>
>>
