* Paolo Bonzini (pbonz...@redhat.com) wrote:
> Il 03/10/2014 19:47, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) ha scritto:
> > + bool one_message = false;
> > + /* This looks good, but it's possible that the device loading in
> > the
> > + * main thread hasn't finished yet, and so we might not be in 'RUN'
> > + * state yet.
> > + * TODO: Using an atomic_xchg or something for this
>
> This looks like a good match for QemuEvent. Or just mutex & condvar.
Done, QemuEvent seems to work nicely.
>
> > + */
> > + while (mis->postcopy_ram_state == POSTCOPY_RAM_INCOMING_LISTENING)
> > {
>
> What if we had postcopy of something else than RAM? Can you remove the
> "ram" part from the symbols that do not directly deal with RAM but just
> with the protocol?
Done; that's 'postcopy_state' and 'POSTCOPY_INCOMING_LISTENING'
a lot of the internal command enums have also lost the 'RAM'; but not
all of them (hopefully just the ones where it makes sense). Similarly
the loadvm_postcopy_ram_handle's are now loadvm_postcopy_handle_...
I've kept the hmp/qmp command with the 'ram'.
Dave
> Paolo
>
> > + if (!one_message) {
> > + DPRINTF("%s: Waiting for RUN", __func__);
> > + one_message = true;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + }
>
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
