From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABF0EC47082 for ; Wed, 26 May 2021 14:53:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D111613B4 for ; Wed, 26 May 2021 14:53:19 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5D111613B4 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:44002 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lluuM-0007Bf-DL for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 26 May 2021 10:53:18 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45794) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lluqb-0003Zp-5R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2021 10:49:25 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:26842) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lluqU-0004B0-63 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 26 May 2021 10:49:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1622040557; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=GuEBUIHRcilkEenVUnOnHFZ3xrs0F0giDqz3qWqluRo=; b=EhhX7AQoRlR1bGzvPisFflXSH40JGJyABIgYsUblcRYgJAf+2i/wXTHp9PURk4ZbMgUIHe y1A1PAGuwDbwb8DraArMOKaId1Zm7GC52yK6DyxRthVwTO5SDzXalcQt4TmjJGdYNdMKCR hU2908l8ZIbMuTrBvZsFfrrtCedlBu8= Received: from mail-ed1-f72.google.com (mail-ed1-f72.google.com [209.85.208.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-343-je4fIgkYPG2V0BAPWr1C5Q-1; Wed, 26 May 2021 10:49:15 -0400 X-MC-Unique: je4fIgkYPG2V0BAPWr1C5Q-1 Received: by mail-ed1-f72.google.com with SMTP id e15-20020a056402148fb029038f9ac2d3afso515093edv.9 for ; Wed, 26 May 2021 07:49:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=GuEBUIHRcilkEenVUnOnHFZ3xrs0F0giDqz3qWqluRo=; b=ifadbb5cgND7q9Ni4T/5SA8GGWedIM4zR9XZUfMp+v/TgIHztsCMmsBAtLcx3XZfwp K/F5H1nqw3hNSz16LngLeTC4tzOvCZo/xdt0ez7LVxUj3nUzKDUsRaHY7cvoZqA23es6 dsCcNPJqMjS3NWwd+5jGx1WmW3+RZEdCh3pMxaOfOlR+tAbUjq7X3c1JzS2zQ8Ro2moS EegLBMLPEypauB4Gy2clGBCw1A9Euhddlw7zOBnl4eJgvcxtr0iGr8qGVHXsJbDjsp2C lQXcUSG1XCpRelxxQQrLY5K48BNCDvbxjUWSXPN8C5nhmTG0DziwMIMx36HrHlYLcC1L uNUg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ISmgqmr7IaKblXz4kprrXBzwVmtfdZdNVIELWyabCfnrzQe77 yc/DJinxmT4o0pNEn+V4rGjQi0pJibCYT5R8lLzupLkpNGwv9hLlVAm0lEYXm3XtAqerPefP2R5 qdy9ByJcEef1DrOlqN9xUY8aLmh3pOCEow1mL7qaUizb8Q+OSYKFSqbSVaWsAgGAl8Z4= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c7cc:: with SMTP id o12mr38796829eds.291.1622040554056; Wed, 26 May 2021 07:49:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwgpWN0Tj3bYqbEm9qnN5q1KHiILCoLjgmU4yIXh3XUzUOo7fV00gM6jnvJBYL6t/YKpX5q6g== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:c7cc:: with SMTP id o12mr38796810eds.291.1622040553897; Wed, 26 May 2021 07:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:b07:6468:f312:c8dd:75d4:99ab:290a? ([2001:b07:6468:f312:c8dd:75d4:99ab:290a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i8sm857606edv.97.2021.05.26.07.49.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 26 May 2021 07:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] block-copy: add QemuMutex lock for BlockCopyCallState list To: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito , Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , qemu-block@nongnu.org References: <20210518100757.31243-1-eesposit@redhat.com> <20210518100757.31243-6-eesposit@redhat.com> <72b73ec2-da87-f672-6a7d-bba008df9871@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <0f88c4ef-d807-8ad9-cd3c-873c80b1cd37@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 16:49:11 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <72b73ec2-da87-f672-6a7d-bba008df9871@redhat.com> Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=pbonzini@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=pbonzini@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -31 X-Spam_score: -3.2 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.371, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kevin Wolf , John Snow , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , Max Reitz Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 25/05/21 12:58, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote: > > At this point, I would just rename the other lock (tasks_lock) in "lock" > or "state_lock", and substitute it in the calls_lock usages of this > patch. Depending on how it comes out, I may merge this with the previous > patch. Renaming the lock is a good idea indeed. Paolo