Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] Fix QEMU crash on vhost-user socket disconnect.

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 11:09:48AM +0000, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > ------- Original Message -------
> > Sender : Michael S. Tsirkin<mst@redhat.com>
> > Date : Apr 07, 2016 10:01 (GMT+03:00)
> > Title : Re: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix QEMU crash on vhost-user socket disconnect.
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 11:52:56PM +0000, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > > ------- Original Message -------
> > > Sender : Michael S. Tsirkin
> > > Date : Apr 05, 2016 13:46 (GMT+03:00)
> > > Title : Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix QEMU crash on vhost-user socket disconnect.
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:02:01AM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > > > > On 30.03.2016 20:01, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:14:05PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> > > > > >> Currently QEMU always crashes in following scenario (assume that
> > > > > >> vhost-user application is Open vSwitch with 'dpdkvhostuser' port):
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > In fact, wouldn't the right thing to do be stopping the VM?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't think that is reasonable to stop VM on failure of just one of
> > > > > network interfaces.
> > > > 
> > > > We don't start QEMU until vhost user connects, either.
> > > > Making guest run properly with a backend is a much bigger
> > > > project, let's tackle this separately.
> > > > 
> > > > Also, I think handling graceful disconnect is the correct first step.
> > > > Handling misbehaving clients is much harder as we have asserts on remote
> > > > obeying protocol rules all over the place.
> > > > 
> > > > > There may be still working vhost-kernel interfaces.
> > > > > Even connection can still be established if vhost-user interface was in
> > > > > bonding with kernel interface.
> > > > 
> > > > Could not parse this.
> > > >
> > > > > Anyway user should be able to save all his data before QEMU restart.
> > > >
> > > > So reconnect a new backend, and VM will keep going.
> > > 
> > > We cant't do this because of 2 reasons:
> > > 1. Segmentation fault of QEMU on disconnect. (fixed by this patch-set)
> > > 2. There is no reconnect functionality in current QEMU version.
> > > 
> > > So, what are you talking about?
> > > 
> > > Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
> > 
> > One can currently disconnect vhost user clients without killing
> > guests using migration:
> > - save vm
> > - quit qemu
> > - start new qemu
> > - load vm
> >
> > Or using hotplug
> > - request unplug
> > - wait for guest eject
> > - create new device
> 
> This may be fixes second reason mentioned above, but in my scenario (described in cover-letter)
> guset will know that backend disconnected only after segmentation fault. So, there will be
> no opportunity to save or unplug machine.

In cover letter you describe killing vhost user client.
So don't do it then.

> > I would like to make sure we do not create an expectation that guests
> > keep going unconditionally with device present even with backend
> >disconnected. Unfortunately your patchset might create such
> > expectation.
> 
> It's already so, because guest will never know about crach of backend untill it
> tries to communicate via socket.

I agree the current handling isn't good. I am just reluctant to
stick even more stuff in there before 2.6. We need a plan going
forward. I'll think it over during the weekend.

-- 
MST