qemu-block
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 4/4] qapi: add transaction suppo


From: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Subject: Re: [Qemu-block] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 4/4] qapi: add transaction support for x-block-dirty-bitmap-merge
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 17:15:53 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0

11.09.2018 22:45, John Snow wrote:

On 07/06/2018 07:36 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
New action is like clean action: do the whole thing in .prepare and
undo in .abort. This behavior for bitmap-changing actions is needed
because backup job actions use bitmap in .prepare.

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <address@hidden>
---
  qapi/transaction.json |  2 ++
  blockdev.c            | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
  2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/qapi/transaction.json b/qapi/transaction.json
index d7e4274550..5875cdb16c 100644
--- a/qapi/transaction.json
+++ b/qapi/transaction.json
@@ -48,6 +48,7 @@
  # - @block-dirty-bitmap-clear: since 2.5
  # - @x-block-dirty-bitmap-enable: since 3.0
  # - @x-block-dirty-bitmap-disable: since 3.0
+# - @x-block-dirty-bitmap-merge: since 3.1
  # - @blockdev-backup: since 2.3
  # - @blockdev-snapshot: since 2.5
  # - @blockdev-snapshot-internal-sync: since 1.7
@@ -63,6 +64,7 @@
         'block-dirty-bitmap-clear': 'BlockDirtyBitmap',
         'x-block-dirty-bitmap-enable': 'BlockDirtyBitmap',
         'x-block-dirty-bitmap-disable': 'BlockDirtyBitmap',
+       'x-block-dirty-bitmap-merge': 'BlockDirtyBitmapMerge',
         'blockdev-backup': 'BlockdevBackup',
         'blockdev-snapshot': 'BlockdevSnapshot',
         'blockdev-snapshot-internal-sync': 'BlockdevSnapshotInternal',
diff --git a/blockdev.c b/blockdev.c
index 5348e8ba9b..feebbb9a9a 100644
--- a/blockdev.c
+++ b/blockdev.c
@@ -1940,6 +1940,7 @@ static void blockdev_backup_clean(BlkActionState *common)
  typedef struct BlockDirtyBitmapState {
      BlkActionState common;
      BdrvDirtyBitmap *bitmap;
+    BdrvDirtyBitmap *merge_source;
Is this necessary?

looks like it isn't, will drop it.


      BlockDriverState *bs;
      HBitmap *backup;
      bool prepared;
@@ -2112,6 +2113,35 @@ static void 
block_dirty_bitmap_disable_abort(BlkActionState *common)
      }
  }
+static void block_dirty_bitmap_merge_prepare(BlkActionState *common,
+                                             Error **errp)
+{
+    BlockDirtyBitmapMerge *action;
+    BlockDirtyBitmapState *state = DO_UPCAST(BlockDirtyBitmapState,
+                                             common, common);
+
+    if (action_check_completion_mode(common, errp) < 0) {
+        return;
+    }
+
+    action = common->action->u.x_block_dirty_bitmap_merge.data;
+    state->bitmap = block_dirty_bitmap_lookup(action->node,
+                                              action->dst_name,
+                                              &state->bs,
+                                              errp);
+    if (!state->bitmap) {
+        return;
+    }
+
+    state->merge_source = bdrv_find_dirty_bitmap(state->bs, action->src_name);
+    if (!state->merge_source) {
+        return;
+    }
+
+    bdrv_merge_dirty_bitmap(state->bitmap, state->merge_source, &state->backup,
+                            errp);
+}
+
  static void abort_prepare(BlkActionState *common, Error **errp)
  {
      error_setg(errp, "Transaction aborted using Abort action");
@@ -2182,7 +2212,13 @@ static const BlkActionOps actions[] = {
          .instance_size = sizeof(BlockDirtyBitmapState),
          .prepare = block_dirty_bitmap_disable_prepare,
          .abort = block_dirty_bitmap_disable_abort,
-     }
+    },
+    [TRANSACTION_ACTION_KIND_X_BLOCK_DIRTY_BITMAP_MERGE] = {
+        .instance_size = sizeof(BlockDirtyBitmapState),
+        .prepare = block_dirty_bitmap_merge_prepare,
+        .commit = block_dirty_bitmap_free_backup,
+        .abort = block_dirty_bitmap_restore,
+    }
  };
/**

If the new state is not necessary and you remove it:

Reviewed-by: John Snow <address@hidden>


--
Best regards,
Vladimir




reply via email to

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