[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main
From: |
Juan Quintela |
Subject: |
Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll |
Date: |
Fri, 28 Apr 2023 18:54:15 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) |
Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote:
> Am 28.04.2023 um 10:38 hat Juan Quintela geschrieben:
>> Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >> I am perhaps a bit ingenuous here, but it is there a way to convince
>> >> qemu that snapshot_save_job_bh *HAS* to run on the main thread?
>> >
>> > I believe we're talking about a technicality here. I asked another more
>> > fundamental question that nobody has answered yet:
>> >
>> > Why do you think that it's ok to call bdrv_writev_vmstate() without
>> > holding the BQL?
>>
>> I will say this function starts by bdrv_ (i.e. block layer people) and
>> endes with _vmstate (i.e. migration people).
>>
>> To be honest, I don't know. That is why I _supposed_ you have an idea.
>
> My idea is that bdrv_*() can only be called when you hold the BQL, or
> for BlockDriverStates in an iothread the AioContext lock.
>
> Apparently dropping the BQL in migration code was introduced in Paolo's
> commit 9b095037527.
Damn. I reviewed it, so I am as guilty as the author.
10 years later without problems I will not blame that patch.
I guess we changed something else that broke doing it without the lock.
But no, I still don't have suggestions/ideas.
> I'm not sure what this was supposed to improve in
> the case of snapshots because the VM is stopped anyway.
>
> Would anything bad happen if we removed the BQL unlock/lock section in
> qemu_savevm_state() again?
Dunno.
For what is worth, I can say that it survives migration-test, but don't
ask me why/how/...
Fiona, can you check if it fixes your troubles?
Later, Juan.
> Kevin
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, (continued)
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Kevin Wolf, 2023/04/27
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Fiona Ebner, 2023/04/27
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Juan Quintela, 2023/04/27
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Peter Xu, 2023/04/27
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Fiona Ebner, 2023/04/28
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Fiona Ebner, 2023/04/28
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Juan Quintela, 2023/04/28
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Kevin Wolf, 2023/04/28
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Juan Quintela, 2023/04/28
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll, Kevin Wolf, 2023/04/28
- Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll,
Juan Quintela <=