On 11/02/2015 09:47, Fam Zheng wrote:
>> > +rcu_read_lock();
>> > +block = atomic_rcu_read(&ram_list.mru_block);
>> > if (block && block->host && host - block->host < block->max_length) {
>> > goto found;
>> > }
>> >
>> > -QLIST_FOREACH(block, &ram_list.blocks, ne
On Fri, 02/06 17:55, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> From: Mike Day
>
> Allow "unlocked" reads of the ram_list by using an RCU-enabled QLIST.
>
> The ramlist mutex is kept, because call_rcu callbacks are not run within
> the iothread lock. Thus, writers still need to take the ramlist mutex,
> but they n
From: Mike Day
Allow "unlocked" reads of the ram_list by using an RCU-enabled QLIST.
The ramlist mutex is kept, because call_rcu callbacks are not run within
the iothread lock. Thus, writers still need to take the ramlist mutex,
but they no longer need to assume that the iothread lock is taken.
From: Mike Day
Allow "unlocked" reads of the ram_list by using an RCU-enabled QLIST.
The ramlist mutex is kept, because call_rcu callbacks are not run within
the iothread lock. Thus, writers still need to take the ramlist mutex,
but they no longer need to assume that the iothread lock is taken.
