All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Lieven <pl@kamp.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] block/io: wait for serialising requests when a request becomes serialising
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 17:47:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191218164618.GD4632@linux.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1576675026-25046-3-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>

Am 18.12.2019 um 14:17 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben:
> Marking without waiting would not result in actual serialising behavior.
> Thus, make a call bdrv_mark_request_serialising sufficient for
> serialisation to happen.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>

> @@ -1851,13 +1841,18 @@ bdrv_co_write_req_prepare(BdrvChild *child, int64_t offset, uint64_t bytes,
>      assert(!(flags & ~BDRV_REQ_MASK));
>  
>      if (flags & BDRV_REQ_SERIALISING) {
> -        bdrv_mark_request_serialising(req, bdrv_get_cluster_size(bs));
> +        waited = bdrv_mark_request_serialising(req, bdrv_get_cluster_size(bs));
> +        /*
> +         * For a misaligned request, we should have already waited
> +         * in bdrv_padding_rmw_read and locked out concurrent writers.

Actually, bdrv_padding_rmw_read() only asserts that the request is
already serialised. bdrv_mark_request_serialising() is already called by
the callers of bdrv_padding_rmw_read().

> +         */
> +        assert(!waited ||
> +               (req->offset == req->overlap_offset &&
> +                req->bytes == req->overlap_bytes));
> +    } else {
> +        bdrv_wait_serialising_requests(req);
>      }
>  
> -    waited = bdrv_wait_serialising_requests(req);
> -
> -    assert(!waited || !req->serialising ||
> -           is_request_serialising_and_aligned(req));
>      assert(req->overlap_offset <= offset);
>      assert(offset + bytes <= req->overlap_offset + req->overlap_bytes);
>      assert(end_sector <= bs->total_sectors || child->perm & BLK_PERM_RESIZE);

Other than the comment, the patch looks fine to me.

Kevin



  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-18 16:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-18 13:17 [PATCH 0/3] block/io: serialising request clean up and locking fix Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18 13:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] block: eliminate BDRV_REQ_NO_SERIALISING Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18 16:37   ` Kevin Wolf
2019-12-18 16:43     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18 16:51       ` Kevin Wolf
2019-12-18 13:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] block/io: wait for serialising requests when a request becomes serialising Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18 16:47   ` Kevin Wolf [this message]
2019-12-18 13:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] block/io: take bs->reqs_lock in bdrv_mark_request_serialising Paolo Bonzini
2019-12-18 16:59   ` Kevin Wolf
2019-12-18 17:21     ` Paolo Bonzini

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191218164618.GD4632@linux.fritz.box \
    --to=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=pl@kamp.de \
    --cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.