I agree, wait for a reply from Fam
On 2018/5/16 19:43, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 07:14:53PM +0800, WangJie (Pluto) wrote:
>> Hi, Peter Xu:
>> If call aio_epoll_disable() here, aio_epoll_disable() will return
>> before close ctx->epollfd,
>> Because the ctx->epoll_enabled is false in the moment.
>> In the process of addIOThread, aio_context_setup created epoll without
>> call aio_epoll_try_enable,
>> so ctx->epoll_enabled have no chance to set true.
>
> I see that epoll_available will only be set if epollfd != -1, so it
> seems to me to make more sense if we swap the two variables in
> aio_epoll_disable(), from current version:
>
> static void aio_epoll_disable(AioContext *ctx)
> {
> ctx->epoll_available = false;
> if (!ctx->epoll_enabled) {
> return;
> }
> ctx->epoll_enabled = false;
> close(ctx->epollfd);
> }
>
> To:
>
> static void aio_epoll_disable(AioContext *ctx)
> {
> ctx->epoll_enabled = false;
> if (!ctx->epoll_available) {
> return;
> }
> ctx->epoll_available = false;
> close(ctx->epollfd);
> }
>
> What do you think? And Fam?
>
>>
>> On 2018/5/16 16:36, Jie Wang wrote:
>>> +void aio_context_destroy(AioContext *ctx)
>>> +{
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_EPOLL_CREATE1
>>> + if (ctx->epollfd >= 0) {
>>> + close(ctx->epollfd);
>>> + }
>>> +#endif
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> void aio_context_set_poll_params(AioContext *ctx, int64_t max_ns,
>>> int64_t grow, int64_t shrink, Error
>>> **errp)
>>
>