All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	"Maciej S . Szmigiero" <mail@maciej.szmigiero.name>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] migration/multifd: Remove multifd_send_state->pages
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 18:20:28 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a5i9yvhf.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zp7HH6-WeYKXQ-fy@x1n>

Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> writes:

> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 05:21:48PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
>> Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 02:59:05PM -0300, Fabiano Rosas wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >> 
>> >> In this v2 I took Peter's suggestion of keeping the channels' pointers
>> >> and moving only the extra slot. The major changes are in patches 5 and
>> >> 9. Patch 3 introduces the structure:
>> >> 
>> >> typedef enum {
>> >>     MULTIFD_PAYLOAD_NONE,
>> >>     MULTIFD_PAYLOAD_RAM,
>> >> } MultiFDPayloadType;
>> >> 
>> >> struct MultiFDSendData {
>> >>     MultiFDPayloadType type;
>> >>     union {
>> >>         MultiFDPages_t ram;
>> >>     } u;
>> >> };
>> >> 
>> >> I added a NONE type so we can use it to tell when the channel has
>> >> finished sending a packet, since we'll need to switch types between
>> >> clients anyway. This avoids having to introduce a 'size', or 'free'
>> >> variable.
>> >
>> > This at least looks better to me, thanks.
>> >
>> >> 
>> >> WHAT'S MISSING:
>> >> 
>> >> - The support for calling multifd_send() concurrently. Maciej has this
>> >>   in his series so I didn't touch it.
>> >> 
>> >> - A way of adding methods for the new payload type. Currently, the
>> >>   compression methods are somewhat coupled with ram migration, so I'm
>> >>   not sure how to proceed.
>> >
>> > What is this one?  Why compression methods need new payload?  Aren't they
>> > ram-typed?
>> 
>> The data we transport is MultiFDPages_t, yes, but the MultiFDMethods are
>> either nocomp, or the compression-specific methods
>> (e.g. zlib_send_prepare).
>> 
>> How do we add methods for the upcoming new payload types? I don't expect
>> us to continue using nocomp and then do "if (ram)... else if
>> (device_state) ..." inside of them. I would expect us to rename
>> s/nocomp/ram/ and add a new set of MultiFDMethods for the new data type
>> (e.g. vfio_send_prepare, vmstate_send_prepare, etc).
>> 
>> multifd_nocomp_ops -> multifd_ram_ops // rename
>> multifd_zlib_ops   // existing
>> multifd_device_ops // new
>> 
>> The challenge here is that the current framework is nocomp
>> vs. compression. It needs to become ram + compression vs. other types.
>
> IMHO we can keep multifd_ops[] only for RAM.  There's only send_prepare()
> that device state will need, and so far it's only (referring Maciej's
> code):
>
> static int nocomp_send_prepare_device_state(MultiFDSendParams *p,
>                                             Error **errp)
> {
>     multifd_send_prepare_header_device_state(p);
>
>     assert(!(p->flags & MULTIFD_FLAG_SYNC));
>
>     p->next_packet_size = p->device_state->buf_len;
>     if (p->next_packet_size > 0) {
>         p->iov[p->iovs_num].iov_base = p->device_state->buf;
>         p->iov[p->iovs_num].iov_len = p->next_packet_size;
>         p->iovs_num++;
>     }
>
>     p->flags |= MULTIFD_FLAG_NOCOMP | MULTIFD_FLAG_DEVICE_STATE;
>
>     multifd_send_fill_packet_device_state(p);
>
>     return 0;
> }
>
> None of other multifd_ops are used.

There's also a conditional around device_state when calling
->recv(). That could seems like it could go to a hook.

https://lore.kernel.org/r/41dedaf2c9abebb5e45f88c052daa26320715a92.1718717584.git.maciej.szmigiero@oracle.com

>
> I think we can directly invoke this part of device state code in
> multifd_send_thread() for now.  So far I think it should be ok.

It's not just that. There's also a check for "if (ram)" at every call to
multifd_ops to avoid calling the ram code when doing the device
migration. It would be way easier to just set noop functions for those.

static MultiFDMethods multifd_devstate_ops = {
    .send_setup = noop_send_setup,
    .send_cleanup = noop_send_cleanup,
    .send_prepare = devstate_send_prepare,
    .recv_setup = noop_recv_setup,
    .recv_cleanup = noop_recv_cleanup,
    .recv = devstate_recv
};

I'm not saying this needs to be done in this series though. But I do
think that's the correct design choice for the long term.


  reply	other threads:[~2024-07-22 21:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-07-22 17:59 [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] migration/multifd: Remove multifd_send_state->pages Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/9] migration/multifd: Reduce access to p->pages Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/9] migration/multifd: Pass in MultiFDPages_t to file_write_ramblock_iov Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 19:21   ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/9] migration/multifd: Introduce MultiFDSendData Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 19:22   ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/9] migration/multifd: Make MultiFDPages_t:offset a flexible array member Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 19:20   ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 20:36     ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/9] migration/multifd: Replace p->pages with an union pointer Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/9] migration/multifd: Move pages accounting into multifd_send_zero_page_detect() Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 19:29   ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 20:07     ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 20:38       ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 7/9] migration/multifd: Isolate ram pages packet data Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 19:37   ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 20:34     ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 21:06       ` Peter Xu
2024-07-24  9:30         ` Maciej S. Szmigiero
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 8/9] migration/multifd: Don't send ram data during SYNC Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 21:03   ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 21:24     ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 17:59 ` [RFC PATCH v2 9/9] migration/multifd: Replace multifd_send_state->pages with client data Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 19:55   ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 20:26     ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 20:41       ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 19:58 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/9] migration/multifd: Remove multifd_send_state->pages Peter Xu
2024-07-22 20:21   ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-22 20:54     ` Peter Xu
2024-07-22 21:20       ` Fabiano Rosas [this message]
2024-07-22 23:01         ` Peter Xu
2024-07-23 17:48           ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-23 18:20             ` Peter Xu
2024-07-23 20:50               ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-07-23 21:11                 ` Peter Xu

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=87a5i9yvhf.fsf@suse.de \
    --to=farosas@suse.de \
    --cc=mail@maciej.szmigiero.name \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --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.