qemu-stable
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-stable] [PATCH v2] block/vdi: Add locking for parallel request


From: Max Reitz
Subject: Re: [Qemu-stable] [PATCH v2] block/vdi: Add locking for parallel requests
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 11:57:54 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0

On 2015-02-27 at 11:57, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 09:05:47AM -0500, Max Reitz wrote:
Concurrently modifying the bmap does not seem to be a good idea; this patch adds
a lock for it. See https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1422307 for what
can go wrong without.

Cc: qemu-stable <address@hidden>
Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <address@hidden>
---
v2:
- Make the mutex cover vdi_co_write() completely [Kevin]
- Add a TODO comment [Kevin]
---
  block/vdi.c | 11 +++++++++++
  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)

diff --git a/block/vdi.c b/block/vdi.c
index 74030c6..f5f42ef 100644
--- a/block/vdi.c
+++ b/block/vdi.c
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@
#include "qemu-common.h"
  #include "block/block_int.h"
+#include "block/coroutine.h"
  #include "qemu/module.h"
  #include "migration/migration.h"
@@ -196,6 +197,8 @@ typedef struct {
      /* VDI header (converted to host endianness). */
      VdiHeader header;
+ CoMutex bmap_lock;
+
      Error *migration_blocker;
  } BDRVVdiState;
@@ -498,6 +501,8 @@ static int vdi_open(BlockDriverState *bs, QDict *options, int flags,
          goto fail_free_bmap;
      }
+ qemu_co_mutex_init(&s->bmap_lock);
+
      /* Disable migration when vdi images are used */
      error_set(&s->migration_blocker,
                QERR_BLOCK_FORMAT_FEATURE_NOT_SUPPORTED,
@@ -607,6 +612,9 @@ static int vdi_co_write(BlockDriverState *bs,
logout("\n"); + /* TODO: Figure out why this is necessary */
+    qemu_co_mutex_lock(&s->bmap_lock);
If we don't know why bmap_lock works, it would be more approprate to
take the same approach as VMDK and VHDX where there is a simply s->lock
that protects all reads and writes.  That way we know for sure there is
no parallel I/O going on.

(Since the problem is not understood, maybe reads in parallel with
writes could also cause problems.  Better to really do a coarse lock
instead of just bmap_lock in write.)

OK, will do.

Max



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]