On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 5:06 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 20/03/20 00:34, dnbrd...@gmail.com wrote:
> > index 682abd8e09..89f8a656a4 100644
> > --- a/block/iscsi.c
> > +++ b/block/iscsi.c
> > @@ -1086,7 +1086,7 @@ static BlockAIOCB *iscsi_aio_ioctl(BlockDriverState
> > *bs,
> > acb->task->expxferlen = acb->ioh->dxfer_len;
> >
> > data.size = 0;
> > - qemu_mutex_lock(&iscsilun->mutex);
> > + QEMU_LOCK_GUARD(&iscsilun->mutex);
> > if (acb->task->xfer_dir == SCSI_XFER_WRITE) {
> > if (acb->ioh->iovec_count == 0) {
> > data.data = acb->ioh->dxferp;
> > @@ -1102,7 +1102,6 @@ static BlockAIOCB *iscsi_aio_ioctl(BlockDriverState
> > *bs,
> > iscsi_aio_ioctl_cb,
> > (data.size > 0) ? &data : NULL,
> > acb) != 0) {
> > - qemu_mutex_unlock(&iscsilun->mutex);
> > scsi_free_scsi_task(acb->task);
> > qemu_aio_unref(acb);
> > return NULL;
>
> Not exactly the same, should be okay but it also should be noted in the
> changelog.
Going to drop this change in the next version, I don't want this patch
to include cases
with possible side effects as I skipped other ones like this already.
> > void cpu_list_remove(CPUState *cpu)
> > {
> > - qemu_mutex_lock(&qemu_cpu_list_lock);
> > + QEMU_LOCK_GUARD(&qemu_cpu_list_lock);
> > if (!QTAILQ_IN_USE(cpu, node)) {
> > /* there is nothing to undo since cpu_exec_init() hasn't been
> > called */
> > qemu_mutex_unlock(&qemu_cpu_list_lock);
>
>
> Missed unlock.
>
> Otherwise looks good.
>
> Paolo
>
Thanks for the review, I'll fix the changes you pointed out in the next version.
Daniel
