On Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:59:29 -0300 Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 08:20:54AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > first remove VCPU from exec loop and only then remove lapic. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen Fan <chen.fan.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> > > Signed-off-by: Gu Zheng <guz.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> > > Signed-off-by: Zhu Guihua <zhugh.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> > > --- > > target-i386/cpu.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/target-i386/cpu.c b/target-i386/cpu.c > > index 2fa445d..f86dae0 100644 > > --- a/target-i386/cpu.c > > +++ b/target-i386/cpu.c > > @@ -2963,6 +2963,20 @@ out: > > } > > } > > > > +static void x86_cpu_unrealizefn(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) > > +{ > > + X86CPU *cpu = X86_CPU(dev); > > + > > +#ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY > > + cpu_remove_sync(CPU(dev)); > > + qemu_unregister_reset(x86_cpu_machine_reset_cb, dev); > > +#endif > > + > > + if (cpu->apic_state) { > > + object_unparent(OBJECT(cpu->apic_state)); > > As patch 17/19 drops the reference corresponding to > cpu->apic_state (leaving only the child property reference), this > will leave cpu->apic_state pointing to a dead object. Please set > it to NULL. true, if we go with this explicit unparenting then cpu->apic_state should be set to NULL. If we only unrealize here then we do not need set cpu->apic_state to NULL here as apic will die together with CPU instance when it starts to destroy its children. > > > + } > > +} > > + > > typedef struct BitProperty { > > uint32_t *ptr; > > uint32_t mask; > > @@ -3205,6 +3219,7 @@ static void x86_cpu_common_class_init(ObjectClass > > *oc, void *data) > > > > xcc->parent_realize = dc->realize; > > dc->realize = x86_cpu_realizefn; > > + dc->unrealize = x86_cpu_unrealizefn; > > dc->props = x86_cpu_properties; > > > > xcc->parent_reset = cc->reset; > > -- > > 2.7.0 > > >