From: Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de>
To: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru>,
Andrey Drobyshev <andrey.drobyshev@virtuozzo.com>,
qemu-block@nongnu.org
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, hreitz@redhat.com, kwolf@redhat.com,
eesposit@redhat.com, den@virtuozzo.com,
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Bug Report][RFC PATCH 1/1] block: fix failing assert on paused VM migration
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2024 17:53:19 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87set5roao.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <29cd78e2-be26-41a4-92c4-a327efe76177@yandex-team.ru>
Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@yandex-team.ru> writes:
> On 30.09.24 17:07, Andrey Drobyshev wrote:
>> On 9/30/24 12:25 PM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>>> [add migration maintainers]
>>>
>>> On 24.09.24 15:56, Andrey Drobyshev wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I doubt that this a correct way to go.
>>>
>>> As far as I understand, "inactive" actually means that "storage is not
>>> belong to qemu, but to someone else (another qemu process for example),
>>> and may be changed transparently". In turn this means that Qemu should
>>> do nothing with inactive disks. So the problem is that nobody called
>>> bdrv_activate_all on target, and we shouldn't ignore that.
>>>
>>> Hmm, I see in process_incoming_migration_bh() we do call
>>> bdrv_activate_all(), but only in some scenarios. May be, the condition
>>> should be less strict here.
>>>
>>> Why we need any condition here at all? Don't we want to activate
>>> block-layer on target after migration anyway?
>>>
>>
>> Hmm I'm not sure about the unconditional activation, since we at least
>> have to honor LATE_BLOCK_ACTIVATE cap if it's set (and probably delay it
>> in such a case). In current libvirt upstream I see such code:
>>
>>> /* Migration capabilities which should always be enabled as long as they
>>> * are supported by QEMU. If the capability is supposed to be enabled on both
>>> * sides of migration, it won't be enabled unless both sides support it.
>>> */
>>> static const qemuMigrationParamsAlwaysOnItem qemuMigrationParamsAlwaysOn[] = {
>>> {QEMU_MIGRATION_CAP_PAUSE_BEFORE_SWITCHOVER,
>>> QEMU_MIGRATION_SOURCE},
>>>
>>> {QEMU_MIGRATION_CAP_LATE_BLOCK_ACTIVATE,
>>> QEMU_MIGRATION_DESTINATION},
>>> };
>>
>> which means that libvirt always wants LATE_BLOCK_ACTIVATE to be set.
>>
>> The code from process_incoming_migration_bh() you're referring to:
>>
>>> /* If capability late_block_activate is set:
>>> * Only fire up the block code now if we're going to restart the
>>> * VM, else 'cont' will do it.
>>> * This causes file locking to happen; so we don't want it to happen
>>> * unless we really are starting the VM.
>>> */
>>> if (!migrate_late_block_activate() ||
>>> (autostart && (!global_state_received() ||
>>> runstate_is_live(global_state_get_runstate())))) {
>>> /* Make sure all file formats throw away their mutable metadata.
>>> * If we get an error here, just don't restart the VM yet. */
>>> bdrv_activate_all(&local_err);
>>> if (local_err) {
>>> error_report_err(local_err);
>>> local_err = NULL;
>>> autostart = false;
>>> }
>>> }
>>
>> It states explicitly that we're either going to start VM right at this
>> point if (autostart == true), or we wait till "cont" command happens.
>> None of this is going to happen if we start another migration while
>> still being in PAUSED state. So I think it seems reasonable to take
>> such case into account. For instance, this patch does prevent the crash:
>>
>>> diff --git a/migration/migration.c b/migration/migration.c
>>> index ae2be31557..3222f6745b 100644
>>> --- a/migration/migration.c
>>> +++ b/migration/migration.c
>>> @@ -733,7 +733,8 @@ static void process_incoming_migration_bh(void *opaque)
>>> */
>>> if (!migrate_late_block_activate() ||
>>> (autostart && (!global_state_received() ||
>>> - runstate_is_live(global_state_get_runstate())))) {
>>> + runstate_is_live(global_state_get_runstate()))) ||
>>> + (!autostart && global_state_get_runstate() == RUN_STATE_PAUSED)) {
>>> /* Make sure all file formats throw away their mutable metadata.
>>> * If we get an error here, just don't restart the VM yet. */
>>> bdrv_activate_all(&local_err);
>>
>> What are your thoughts on it?
>>
This bug is the same as https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/2395
>
> Hmmm... Don't we violate "late-block-activate" contract by this?
>
> Me go and check:
>
> # @late-block-activate: If enabled, the destination will not activate
> # block devices (and thus take locks) immediately at the end of
> # migration. (since 3.0)
>
> Yes, we'll violate it by this patch. So, for now the only exception is
> when autostart is enabled, but libvirt correctly use
> late-block-activate + !autostart.
>
> Interesting, when block layer is assumed to be activated.. Aha, only in qmp_cont().
>
>
> So, what to do with this all:
>
> Either libvirt should not use late-block-activate for migration of
> stopped vm. This way target would be automatically activated
>
> Or if libvirt still need postponed activation (I assume, for correctly
> switching shared disks, etc), Libvirt should do some additional QMP
> call. It can't be "cont", if we don't want to run the VM. So,
> probably, we need additional "block-activate" QMP command for this.
A third option might be to unconditionally activate in qmp_migrate:
-- >8 --
From 1890c7989e951a2702735f933d1567e48fa464a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 17:51:57 -0300
Subject: [PATCH] tmp
---
migration/migration.c | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/migration/migration.c b/migration/migration.c
index 021faee2f3..6bf1f039d1 100644
--- a/migration/migration.c
+++ b/migration/migration.c
@@ -2068,6 +2068,16 @@ static bool migrate_prepare(MigrationState *s, bool resume, Error **errp)
return false;
}
+ /*
+ * The VM might have been target of a previous migration. If it
+ * was in the paused state then nothing will have required the
+ * block layer to be activated. Do it now to ensure this QEMU
+ * instance owns the disk locks.
+ */
+ if (!resume && runstate_check(RUN_STATE_PAUSED)) {
+ bdrv_activate_all(errp);
+ }
+
return true;
}
--
2.35.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-09 20:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-24 12:56 [Bug Report][RFC PATCH 0/1] block: fix failing assert on paused VM migration Andrey Drobyshev
2024-09-24 12:56 ` [Bug Report][RFC PATCH 1/1] " Andrey Drobyshev
2024-09-30 9:25 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2024-09-30 14:07 ` Andrey Drobyshev
2024-10-01 9:54 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2024-10-09 20:53 ` Fabiano Rosas [this message]
2024-10-10 6:48 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2024-10-10 14:30 ` Fabiano Rosas
2024-10-10 15:42 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2024-10-10 19:21 ` Fabiano Rosas
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=87set5roao.fsf@suse.de \
--to=farosas@suse.de \
--cc=andrey.drobyshev@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=den@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=eesposit@redhat.com \
--cc=hreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=vsementsov@yandex-team.ru \
/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.