Reimplement qemu_register_reset() via qemu_register_resettable().
We define a new LegacyReset object which implements Resettable and
defines its reset hold phase method to call a QEMUResetHandler
function. When qemu_register_reset() is called, we create a new
LegacyReset object and add it to the simulation_reset
ResettableContainer. When qemu_unregister_reset() is called, we find
the LegacyReset object in the container and remove it.
This implementation of qemu_unregister_reset() means we'll end up
scanning the ResetContainer's list of child objects twice, once
to find the LegacyReset object, and once in g_ptr_array_remove().
In theory we could avoid this by having the ResettableContainer
interface include a resettable_container_remove_with_equal_func()
that took a callback method so that we could use
g_ptr_array_find_with_equal_func() and g_ptr_array_remove_index().
But we don't expect qemu_unregister_reset() to be called frequently
or in hot paths, and we expect the simulation_reset container to
usually not have many children.
Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20240220160622.114437-9-peter.maydell@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
Implement new functions qemu_register_resettable() and
qemu_unregister_resettable(). These are intended to be
three-phase-reset aware equivalents of the old qemu_register_reset()
and qemu_unregister_reset(). Instead of passing in a function
pointer and opaque, you register any QOM object that implements the
Resettable interface.
The implementation is simple: we have a single global instance of a
ResettableContainer, which we reset in qemu_devices_reset(), and
the Resettable objects passed to qemu_register_resettable() are
added to it.
Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20240220160622.114437-8-peter.maydell@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com>
Snapshot loading only expects to call deterministic handlers, not
non-deterministic ones. So introduce a way of registering handlers that
won't be called when reseting for snapshots.
Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Message-id: 20221025004327.568476-2-Jason@zx2c4.com
[PMM: updated json doc comment with Markus' text; fixed
checkpatch style nit]
Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
g_new(T, n) is neater than g_malloc(sizeof(T) * n). It's also safer,
for two reasons. One, it catches multiplication overflowing size_t.
Two, it returns T * rather than void *, which lets the compiler catch
more type errors.
This commit only touches allocations with size arguments of the form
sizeof(T).
Patch created mechanically with:
$ spatch --in-place --sp-file scripts/coccinelle/use-g_new-etc.cocci \
--macro-file scripts/cocci-macro-file.h FILES...
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org>
Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20220315144156.1595462-4-armbru@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Pavel Dovgalyuk <Pavel.Dovgalyuk@ispras.ru>
Most list head structs need not be given a name. In most cases the
name is given just in case one is going to use QTAILQ_LAST, QTAILQ_PREV
or reverse iteration, but this does not apply to lists of other kinds,
and even for QTAILQ in practice this is only rarely needed. In addition,
we will soon reimplement those macros completely so that they do not
need a name for the head struct. So clean up everything, not giving a
name except in the rare case where it is necessary.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
They are small, it is not worth stubbing them. Just include them
in user-mode emulators and unit tests as well.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Peter Maydell
Jason A. Donenfeld
Markus Armbruster
Paolo Bonzini