On 17/02/2022 14:45, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:34:57AM -0500, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
>> Instead of having the lock in job_tnx_apply, move it inside
>
> s/tnx/txn/
>
>> in the callback. This will be helpful for next commits, when
>> we introduce job_lock/unl
On 17/02/2022 14:45, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:34:57AM -0500, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
>> Instead of having the lock in job_tnx_apply, move it inside
>
> s/tnx/txn/
>
>> in the callback. This will be helpful for next commits, when
>> we introduce job_lock/unl
On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:34:57AM -0500, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
> Instead of having the lock in job_tnx_apply, move it inside
s/tnx/txn/
> in the callback. This will be helpful for next commits, when
> we introduce job_lock/unlock pairs.
>
> job_transition_to_pending() and job_needs_
Instead of having the lock in job_tnx_apply, move it inside
in the callback. This will be helpful for next commits, when
we introduce job_lock/unlock pairs.
job_transition_to_pending() and job_needs_finalize() do not
need to be protected by the aiocontext lock.
No functional change intended.
Sig
