Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] nbd/server: introduce NBDClient->lock to protect fields

[Kevin Wolf]

Am 21.12.2023 um 16:35 hat Stefan Hajnoczi geschrieben:
> NBDClient has a number of fields that are accessed by both the export
> AioContext and the main loop thread. When the AioContext lock is removed
> these fields will need another form of protection.
> 
> Add NBDClient->lock and protect fields that are accessed by both
> threads. Also add assertions where possible and otherwise add doc
> comments stating assumptions about which thread and lock holding.
> 
> Note this patch moves the client->recv_coroutine assertion from
> nbd_co_receive_request() to nbd_trip() where client->lock is held.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

> +/* Runs in export AioContext */
> +static void nbd_wake_read_bh(void *opaque)
> +{
> +    NBDClient *client = opaque;
> +    qio_channel_wake_read(client->ioc);
> +}
> +
>  static bool nbd_drained_poll(void *opaque)
>  {
>      NBDExport *exp = opaque;
>      NBDClient *client;
>  
> +    assert(qemu_in_main_thread());
> +
>      QTAILQ_FOREACH(client, &exp->clients, next) {
> -        if (client->nb_requests != 0) {
> -            /*
> -             * If there's a coroutine waiting for a request on nbd_read_eof()
> -             * enter it here so we don't depend on the client to wake it up.
> -             */
> -            if (client->recv_coroutine != NULL && client->read_yielding) {
> -                qio_channel_wake_read(client->ioc);
> +        WITH_QEMU_LOCK_GUARD(&client->lock) {
> +            if (client->nb_requests != 0) {
> +                /*
> +                 * If there's a coroutine waiting for a request on 
> nbd_read_eof()
> +                 * enter it here so we don't depend on the client to wake it 
> up.
> +                 *
> +                 * Schedule a BH in the export AioContext to avoid missing 
> the
> +                 * wake up due to the race between qio_channel_wake_read() 
> and
> +                 * qio_channel_yield().
> +                 */
> +                if (client->recv_coroutine != NULL && client->read_yielding) 
> {
> +                    
> aio_bh_schedule_oneshot(nbd_export_aio_context(client->exp),
> +                                            nbd_wake_read_bh, client);
> +                }

Doesn't the condition have to move inside the BH to avoid the race?

Checking client->recv_coroutine != NULL could work here because I don't
think it can go from NULL to something while we're quiescing, but
client->read_yielding can still change until the BH runs and we know
that the nbd_co_trip() coroutine has yielded. It seems easiest to just
move the whole condition to the BH.

> +                return true;
>              }
> -
> -            return true;
>          }
>      }

The rest looks good to me.

Kevin