All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc: Umesh Deshpande <udeshpan@redhat.com>,
	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] Separate migration thread
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:48:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E5CA3CB.5070707@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110829184949.GA4924@amt.cnet>

On 08/29/2011 08:49 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>> >  -static void buffered_rate_tick(void *opaque)
>> >  +static void *migrate_vm(void *opaque)
>> >    {
>
> buffered_file.c was generic code that has now become migration specific
> (although migration was the only user). So it should either stop
> pretending to be generic code, by rename to migration_thread.c along
> with un-exporting interfaces, or it should remain generic and therefore
> all migration specific knowledge moved somewhere else.

Actually, the thread function is ill-named.  buffered_file.c is still 
generic code (or if it is not, it's a bug), except it should be called 
threaded_file.c.

Moving it to migration.c is also an option of course.  I asked Umesh to 
keep the abstraction for now, because it helped pinpointing places where 
abstractions were leaking in (such as the qemu_mutex_unlock_migrate_ram 
call that you found).

>> +    int64_t current_time, expire_time = qemu_get_clock_ms(rt_clock) + 100;
>> +    struct timeval tv = { .tv_sec = 0, .tv_usec = 100000};
>
> qemu_get_clock_ms should happen under iothread lock.

For rt_clock it is safe.  Should be documented, though.

>> +    qemu_mutex_lock_migrate_ram();
>>      s = migrate_to_fms(current_migration);
>>      if (s && s->file) {
>>          qemu_file_set_rate_limit(s->file, max_throttle);
>>      }
>> +    qemu_mutex_unlock_migrate_ram();
>
> This lock protects the RAMlist, and only the RAMlist, but here its
> being used to protect migration thread data. As noted above, a new lock
> should be introduced.

Even better, freeing the buffered_file should be only done in the 
iothread (if this is not the case) so that the lock can be pushed down 
to buffered_set_rate_limit...

> +        qemu_mutex_lock_migrate_ram();
>          if (qemu_fclose(s->file) != 0) {
>              ret = -1;
>          }
> +        qemu_mutex_unlock_migrate_ram();

... and buffered_close (if a lock turns out to be needed at all).

Paolo

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>,
	Umesh Deshpande <udeshpan@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] Separate migration thread
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:48:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E5CA3CB.5070707@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110829184949.GA4924@amt.cnet>

On 08/29/2011 08:49 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>> >  -static void buffered_rate_tick(void *opaque)
>> >  +static void *migrate_vm(void *opaque)
>> >    {
>
> buffered_file.c was generic code that has now become migration specific
> (although migration was the only user). So it should either stop
> pretending to be generic code, by rename to migration_thread.c along
> with un-exporting interfaces, or it should remain generic and therefore
> all migration specific knowledge moved somewhere else.

Actually, the thread function is ill-named.  buffered_file.c is still 
generic code (or if it is not, it's a bug), except it should be called 
threaded_file.c.

Moving it to migration.c is also an option of course.  I asked Umesh to 
keep the abstraction for now, because it helped pinpointing places where 
abstractions were leaking in (such as the qemu_mutex_unlock_migrate_ram 
call that you found).

>> +    int64_t current_time, expire_time = qemu_get_clock_ms(rt_clock) + 100;
>> +    struct timeval tv = { .tv_sec = 0, .tv_usec = 100000};
>
> qemu_get_clock_ms should happen under iothread lock.

For rt_clock it is safe.  Should be documented, though.

>> +    qemu_mutex_lock_migrate_ram();
>>      s = migrate_to_fms(current_migration);
>>      if (s && s->file) {
>>          qemu_file_set_rate_limit(s->file, max_throttle);
>>      }
>> +    qemu_mutex_unlock_migrate_ram();
>
> This lock protects the RAMlist, and only the RAMlist, but here its
> being used to protect migration thread data. As noted above, a new lock
> should be introduced.

Even better, freeing the buffered_file should be only done in the 
iothread (if this is not the case) so that the lock can be pushed down 
to buffered_set_rate_limit...

> +        qemu_mutex_lock_migrate_ram();
>          if (qemu_fclose(s->file) != 0) {
>              ret = -1;
>          }
> +        qemu_mutex_unlock_migrate_ram();

... and buffered_close (if a lock turns out to be needed at all).

Paolo

  reply	other threads:[~2011-08-30  8:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-08-27 18:09 [PATCH 0/5] Separate thread for VM migration Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09 ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09 ` [PATCH 1/5] Support for vm_stop from the migration thread Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09   ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-29 16:56   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2011-08-29 16:56     ` [Qemu-devel] " Marcelo Tosatti
2011-08-30  8:40     ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-08-30  8:40       ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2011-08-27 18:09 ` [PATCH 2/5] MRU ram block list Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09   ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09 ` [PATCH 3/5] Migration thread mutex Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09   ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-29  9:04   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2011-08-29  9:04     ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefan Hajnoczi
2011-08-29 13:49     ` Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-29 13:49       ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-29 18:40   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2011-08-29 18:40     ` [Qemu-devel] " Marcelo Tosatti
2011-08-27 18:09 ` [PATCH 4/5] Separate migration dirty bitmap Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09   ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09 ` [PATCH 5/5] Separate migration thread Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-27 18:09   ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-29  9:09   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2011-08-29  9:09     ` [Qemu-devel] " Stefan Hajnoczi
2011-08-29 13:49     ` Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-29 13:49       ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-29 18:49   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2011-08-29 18:49     ` [Qemu-devel] " Marcelo Tosatti
2011-08-30  8:48     ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2011-08-30  8:48       ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-08-30 12:31       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2011-08-30 12:31         ` [Qemu-devel] " Marcelo Tosatti
2011-08-29 10:20 ` [PATCH 0/5] Separate thread for VM migration Paolo Bonzini
2011-08-29 10:20   ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2011-08-31  3:53   ` Umesh Deshpande
2011-08-31  3:53     ` [Qemu-devel] " Umesh Deshpande

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=4E5CA3CB.5070707@redhat.com \
    --to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=aliguori@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=udeshpan@redhat.com \
    /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.