qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] backup notifier fail policy


From: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] backup notifier fail policy
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 21:59:16 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0

On 30.09.2016 20:11, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
Hi all!

Please, can somebody explain me, why we fail guest request in case of io error in write notifier? I think guest consistency is more important than success of unfinished backup. Or, what am I missing?

I'm saying about this code:

static int coroutine_fn backup_before_write_notify(
        NotifierWithReturn *notifier,
        void *opaque)
{
BackupBlockJob *job = container_of(notifier, BackupBlockJob, before_write);
    BdrvTrackedRequest *req = opaque;
    int64_t sector_num = req->offset >> BDRV_SECTOR_BITS;
    int nb_sectors = req->bytes >> BDRV_SECTOR_BITS;

    assert(req->bs == blk_bs(job->common.blk));
    assert((req->offset & (BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE - 1)) == 0);
    assert((req->bytes & (BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE - 1)) == 0);

    return backup_do_cow(job, sector_num, nb_sectors, NULL, true);
}

So, what about something like

ret = backup_do_cow(job, ...
if (ret < 0 && job->notif_ret == 0) {
   job->notif_ret = ret;
}

return 0;

and fail block job if notif_ret < 0 in other places of backup code?


And second question about notifiers in backup block job. If block job is paused, notifiers still works and can copy data. Is it ok? So, user thinks that job is paused, so he can do something with target disk.. But really, this 'something' will race with write-notifiers. So, what assumptions may user actually have about paused backup job? Is there any agreements? Also, on query-block-jobs we will see job.busy = false, when actually copy-on-write may be in flight..

--
Best regards,
Vladimir




reply via email to

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