New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
IOS: Further deglobalization and emulation/maintainance code splitting. #11825
Conversation
f793236
to
094062c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
Source/Core/Core/IOS/IOS.cpp
Outdated
| @@ -304,7 +304,7 @@ Kernel::Kernel(IOSC::ConsoleType console_type) : m_iosc(console_type) | |||
| ASSERT(m_fs); | |||
|
|
|||
| std::lock_guard lock(m_device_map_mutex); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we need to lock this mutex anymore
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Mhm, I suppose it doesn't make much sense to lock this in the constructor, yeah.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In fact... is this mutex needed at all? It's only locked in the constructor, destructor, and a single function (GetDeviceByName()). (AddStaticDevices() is practically part of the constructor)
ESCore implements the core functionality that can also be used outside of emulation. ESDevice implements the IOS device and is only available during emulation.
FSCore implements the core functionality that can also be used outside of emulation. FSDevice implements the IOS device and is only available during emulation.
…modified in the constructor and destructor.
0c18430
to
28b82ff
Compare
@leoetlino You were interested in this back in #11787. I think this is a pretty good solution all things considered.