qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 8/8] parallels: Replace qemu_co_mutex_lock by WITH_QEMU_LO


From: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 8/8] parallels: Replace qemu_co_mutex_lock by WITH_QEMU_LOCK_GUARD
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 00:12:53 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1

On 8/15/22 12:02, Alexander Ivanov wrote:
Replace the way we use mutex in parallels_co_check() for simplier
and less error prone code.

Signed-off-by: Alexander Ivanov <alexander.ivanov@virtuozzo.com>
---
v2: Fix an incorrect usage of WITH_QEMU_LOCK_GUARD.
v3: Fix commit message.

  block/parallels.c | 26 ++++++++++++--------------
  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/block/parallels.c b/block/parallels.c
index d0364182bb..e124a8bb7d 100644
--- a/block/parallels.c
+++ b/block/parallels.c
@@ -553,24 +553,22 @@ static int coroutine_fn 
parallels_co_check(BlockDriverState *bs,
      BDRVParallelsState *s = bs->opaque;
      int ret;
- qemu_co_mutex_lock(&s->lock);
+    WITH_QEMU_LOCK_GUARD(&s->lock) {
+        parallels_check_unclean(bs, res, fix);
- parallels_check_unclean(bs, res, fix);
+        ret = parallels_check_outside_image(bs, res, fix);
+        if (ret < 0) {
+            return ret;
+        }
- ret = parallels_check_outside_image(bs, res, fix);
-    if (ret < 0) {
-        goto out;
-    }
-
-    ret = parallels_check_leak(bs, res, fix);
-    if (ret < 0) {
-        goto out;
-    }
+        ret = parallels_check_leak(bs, res, fix);
+        if (ret < 0) {
+            return ret;
+        }
- parallels_collect_statistics(bs, res, fix);
+        parallels_collect_statistics(bs, res, fix);
-out:
-    qemu_co_mutex_unlock(&s->lock);
+    }
ret = bdrv_co_flush(bs);
      if (ret < 0) {

Aha, and here you silently fix the problem I noted in patch 3. Still, all 
patches should be correct, so this should be rebased onto fixed patch 3.

The final look of parallels_co_check is good.


--
Best regards,
Vladimir



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]