Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/9] block: Rewrite block drain begin/end

[Fam Zheng]

On Wed, 11/29 18:25, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 29.11.2017 um 15:49 hat Fam Zheng geschrieben:
> > While we look at the fixes for 2.11, I briefly prototyped this series
> > to see if it makes sense as a simplification of the drain API for
> > 2.12.
> > 
> > The idea is to let AioContext manage quiesce callbacks, then the block
> > layer only needs to do the in-flight request waiting. This lets us get
> > rid of the callback recursion (both up and down).
> 
> So essentially you don't drain individual nodes any more, but whole
> AioContexts. I have a feeeling that this would be a step in the wrong
> direction.
> 
> Not only would it completely bypass the path I/O requests take and
> potentially drain a lot more than is actually necessary, but it also
> requires that all nodes that are connected in a tree are in the same
> AioContext.

Yeah, good point. Initially I wanted to introduce a BlockGraph object which
manages the per-graph draining, (i.e. where to register the drain callbacks),
but I felt lazy and used AioContext.

Will that make it better?  BlockGraph would be a proper abstraction and will not
limit the API to one AioContext per tree.

> 
> And finally, I don't really think that the recursion is even a problem.
> The problem is with graph changes made by callbacks that drain allows to
> run. With your changes, it might be a bit easier to avoid that
> bdrv_drain() itself gets into trouble due to graph changes, but this
> doesn't solve the problem for any (possibly indirect) callers of
> bdrv_drain().

The recursion is the one big place that can be easily broken by graph changes,
fixing this doesn't make the situation any worse. We could still fix the
indirect callers by taking references or by introducing "ubiquitous coroutines".

Fam