Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/5] rcu: Add automatically released rcu_read_lock variant

[Dr. David Alan Gilbert]

* Paolo Bonzini (address@hidden) wrote:
> On 12/09/19 19:45, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > Do you think it's best to use the block version for all cases
> > or to use the non-block version by taste?
> > The block version is quite nice, but that turns most of the patches
> > into 'indent everything'.
> 
> I don't really know myself.

OK, new version coming up with a mix - the diffs do look a lot more
hectic with the block version.

> On first glance I didn't like too much the non-block version and thought
> it was because our coding standards does not include variables declared
> in the middle of a block.

I took that as being a coding standard to avoid confusing humans and
since it wasn't visible it didn't matter too much.

> However, I think what really bothering me is
> "AUTO" in the name.  What do you think about "RCU_READ_LOCK_GUARD()"?
> The block version would have the additional prefix "WITH_".

Oh well, if it's just the name we can fix that.

> We could also add LOCK_GUARD(lock) and WITH_LOCK_GUARD(lock), using
> QemuLockable for polymorphism.  I even had patches a while ago (though
> they used something like LOCK_GUARD(guard_var, lock).  I think we
> dropped them because of fear that the API was a bit over-engineered.

Probably a separate set.

Dave

> Paolo
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / address@hidden / Manchester, UK