On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 22 June 2012 09:00, Peter Crosthwaite
> <peter.crosthwa...@petalogix.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com> wrote:
>>> Not sure if I understood the intention yet: Is this supposed to fix an
>>> issue with the current usage of coroutines or to extend their usage
>>> beyond that? In the latter case, please don't do this. We'd rather like
>>> to get rid of them long term.
>
>> My extended usage, which is under development and not ready for the
>> list. But are you saying qemu-coroutine is deprecated? If so Ill just
>> re-impelement my work with threads, mutexes and condition vars, but
>> coroutines are the most natural way of doing it.
>
> Basically coroutines are nastily unportable and we've had a set
> of problems with them (as witness the fact that we have three
> separate backend implementations!). There is supposedly some sort
> of migration plan for getting them out of the block layer eventually;
> they're a kind of halfway house for avoiding synchronous I/O there
> AIUI. I would much prefer not to see any further use of them in new
> code. Fundamentally C doesn't support coroutines and it's much better
> to just admit that IMHO and use more idiomatic design approaches
> instead.
>

Sounds depracted to me :) Can we add some comments to coroutine?

> -- PMM

Reply via email to