qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for 2.7 1/1] qcow2: improve qcow2_co_write_zeroe


From: Denis V. Lunev
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for 2.7 1/1] qcow2: improve qcow2_co_write_zeroes()
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:20:45 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1

On 04/25/2016 12:05 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
Am 23.04.2016 um 14:05 hat Denis V. Lunev geschrieben:
Unfortunately Linux kernel could send non-aligned requests to qemu-nbd
if the caller is using O_DIRECT and does not align in-memory data to
page. Thus qemu-nbd will call block layer with non-aligned requests.

qcow2_co_write_zeroes forcibly asks the caller to supply block-aligned
data. In the other case it rejects with ENOTSUP which is properly
handled on the upper level. The problem is that this grows the image.

This could be optimized a bit:
- particular request could be split to block aligned part and head/tail,
   which could be handled separately
In fact, this is what bdrv_co_do_write_zeroes() is already supposed to
do. qcow2 exposes its cluster size as bs->bl.write_zeroes_alignment, so
block/io.c should split the request in three.

If you see something different happening, we may have a bug there.

Pls look to the commit

commit 459b4e66129d091a11e9886ecc15a8bf9f7f3d92
Author: Denis V. Lunev <address@hidden>
Date:   Tue May 12 17:30:56 2015 +0300

    block: align bounce buffers to page

The situation is exactly like the described there. The user
of the /dev/nbd0 writes with O_DIRECT and has unaligned
to page buffers. Thus real operations on qemu-nbd
layer becomes unaligned to block size.

Thus bdrv_co_do_write_zeroes is helpless here unfortunately.
We have this problem with 3rd party software performing
restoration from the backup.

The program is 100% reproducible. The following sequence
is performed:

#define _GNU_SOURCE

#include <stdio.h>
#include <malloc.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <sys/fcntl.h>
#include <unistd.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    char *buf;
    int fd;

    if (argc != 2) {
        return -1;
    }

    fd = open(argv[1], O_WRONLY | O_DIRECT);

    do {
        buf = memalign(512, 1024 * 1024);
    } while (!(unsigned long)buf & (4096 - 1));
    memset(buf, 0, 1024 * 1024);
    write(fd, buf, 1024 * 1024);
    return 0;
}

This program is compiled as a.out.

Before the patch:
hades ~/src/qemu $ qemu-img create -f qcow2 test.qcow2 64G
Formatting 'test.qcow2', fmt=qcow2 size=68719476736 encryption=off cluster_size=65536 lazy_refcounts=off refcount_bits=16 hades ~/src/qemu $ sudo ./qemu-nbd --connect=/dev/nbd3 test.qcow2 --detect-zeroes=on --aio=native --cache=none
hades ~/src/qemu $ sudo ./a.out /dev/nbd3
hades ~/src/qemu $ ls -als test.qcow2
772 -rw-r--r-- 1 den den 851968 Apr 25 12:48 test.qcow2
hades ~/src/qemu $

After the patch:
hades ~/src/qemu $ qemu-img create -f qcow2 test.qcow2 64G
Formatting 'test.qcow2', fmt=qcow2 size=68719476736 encryption=off cluster_size=65536 lazy_refcounts=off refcount_bits=16 hades ~/src/qemu $ sudo ./qemu-nbd --connect=/dev/nbd3 test.qcow2 --detect-zeroes=on --aio=native --cache=none
hades ~/src/qemu $ sudo ./a.out /dev/nbd3
hades ~/src/qemu $ ls -als test.qcow2
260 -rw-r--r-- 1 den den 327680 Apr 25 12:50 test.qcow2
hades ~/src/qemu $




- writes could be omitted when we do know that the image already contains
   zeroes at the offsets being written
I don't think this is a valid shortcut. The semantics of a write_zeroes
operation is that the zeros (literal or as flags) are stored in this
layer and that the backing file isn't involved any more for the given
sectors. For example, a streaming operation or qemu-img rebase may
involve write_zeroes operations, and relying on the backing file would
cause corruption there (because the whole point of the operation is that
the backing file can be removed).
this is not a problem. The block will be abscent and thus it will be
read as zeroes.


And to be honest, writing zero flags in memory to the cached L2 table is
an operation so quick that calling bdrv_get_block_status_above() might
actually end up slower in most cases than just setting the flag.
Main fast path is not touched. bdrv_get_block_status_above() is called only for
non-aligned parts of the operation.

Den



reply via email to

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