[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [RFC PATCH] qcow2: Fix race in cache invalidation

On 09/24/2014 07:48 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 23.09.2014 um 10:47 hat Alexey Kardashevskiy geschrieben:
>> On 09/19/2014 06:47 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:> Am 16.09.2014 um 14:59 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben:
>>>> Il 16/09/2014 14:52, Kevin Wolf ha scritto:
>>>>> Yes, that's true. We can't fix this problem in qcow2, though, because
>>>>> it's a more general one.  I think we must make sure that
>>>>> bdrv_invalidate_cache() doesn't yield.
>>>>> Either by forbidding to run bdrv_invalidate_cache() in a coroutine and
>>>>> moving the problem to the caller (where and why is it even called from a
>>>>> coroutine?), or possibly by creating a new coroutine for the driver
>>>>> callback and running that in a nested event loop that only handles
>>>>> bdrv_invalidate_cache() callbacks, so that the NBD server doesn't get a
>>>>> chance to process new requests in this thread.
>>>> Incoming migration runs in a coroutine (the coroutine entry point is
>>>> process_incoming_migration_co).  But everything after qemu_fclose() can
>>>> probably be moved into a separate bottom half, so that it gets out of
>>>> coroutine context.
>>> Alexey, you should probably rather try this (and add a bdrv_drain_all()
>>> in bdrv_invalidate_cache) than messing around with qcow2 locks. This
>>> isn't a problem that can be completely fixed in qcow2.
>> Ok. Tried :) Not very successful though. The patch is below.
>> Is that the correct bottom half? When I did it, I started getting crashes
>> in various sport on accesses to s->l1_cache which is NULL after qcow2_close.
>> Normally the code would check s->l1_size and then use but they are out of sync.
> No, that's not the place we were talking about.
> What Paolo meant is that in process_incoming_migration_co(), you can
> split out the final part that calls bdrv_invalidate_cache_all() into a
> BH (you need to move everything until the end of the function into the
> BH then). His suggestion was to move everything below the qemu_fclose().

Ufff. I took it very literally. Ok. Let it be
process_incoming_migration_co(). But there is something I am missing about
BHs. Here is a patch:

diff --git a/migration.c b/migration.c
index 6db04a6..101043e 100644
--- a/migration.c
+++ b/migration.c
@@ -88,6 +88,9 @@ void qemu_start_incoming_migration(const char *uri, Error

+static QEMUBH *migration_complete_bh;
+static void process_incoming_migration_complete(void *opaque);
 static void process_incoming_migration_co(void *opaque)
     QEMUFile *f = opaque;
@@ -117,6 +120,16 @@ static void process_incoming_migration_co(void *opaque)
     } else {
+    migration_complete_bh = aio_bh_new(qemu_get_aio_context(),
+                                       process_incoming_migration_complete,
+                                       NULL);
+static void process_incoming_migration_complete(void *opaque)
+    qemu_bh_delete(migration_complete_bh);
+    migration_complete_bh = NULL;

 void process_incoming_migration(QEMUFile *f)

Then I run it under gdb and set breakpoint in
process_incoming_migration_complete - and it never hits. Why is that? Thanks.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]