On 27/09/2016 18:29, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 27/09/2016 16:06, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: >>> See the doc comments for a description of this new coroutine API. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> include/qemu/coroutine.h | 13 +++++++++++++ >>> util/qemu-coroutine.c | 5 +++++ >>> 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/include/qemu/coroutine.h b/include/qemu/coroutine.h >>> index 29a2078..e6a60d5 100644 >>> --- a/include/qemu/coroutine.h >>> +++ b/include/qemu/coroutine.h >>> @@ -92,6 +92,19 @@ Coroutine *coroutine_fn qemu_coroutine_self(void); >>> */ >>> bool qemu_in_coroutine(void); >>> >>> +/** >>> + * Return true if the coroutine is currently entered >>> + * >>> + * A coroutine is "entered" if it has not yielded from the current >>> + * qemu_coroutine_enter() call used to run it. This does not mean that the >>> + * coroutine is currently executing code since it may have transferred >>> control >>> + * to another coroutine using qemu_coroutine_enter(). >>> + * >>> + * When several coroutines enter each other there may be no way to know >>> which >>> + * ones have already been entered. In such situations this function can be >>> + * used to avoid recursively entering coroutines. >>> + */ >>> +bool qemu_coroutine_entered(Coroutine *co); >> >> Perhaps qemu_coroutine_running is a better name? > > I find "running" confusing since the coroutine may not actually be > currently executing (as mentioned in the doc comment).
Ok, makes sense. Another possibility is qemu_coroutine_on_stack, but I'm not sure it's better... Paolo