From: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
To: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>,
qemu-block@nongnu.org
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, den@openvz.org, jsnow@redhat.com,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] block/block-copy: reduce intersecting request lock
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 14:38:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1ae71183-4732-fbe6-62d5-58252f01d2d6@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191127180840.11937-7-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10310 bytes --]
On 27.11.19 19:08, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> Currently, block_copy operation lock the whole requested region. But
> there is no reason to lock clusters, which are already copied, it will
> disturb other parallel block_copy requests for no reason.
>
> Let's instead do the following:
>
> Lock only sub-region, which we are going to operate on. Then, after
> copying all dirty sub-regions, we should wait for intersecting
> requests block-copy, if they failed, we should retry these new dirty
> clusters.
Just a thought spoken aloud:
I would expect the number of intersecting CBW requests to be low in
general, so I don’t know how useful this change is in practice. OTOH,
it makes block_copy call the existing implementation in a loop, which
seems just worse.
But then again, in the common case, block_copy_dirty_clusters() won’t
copy anything because it’s all been copied already, so there is no
change; and even if something is copied, the second call will just
re-check the dirty bitmap to see that the area’s clean (which will be
quick compared to the copy operation). So there’s probably nothing to
worry about.
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>
> ---
> block/block-copy.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 95 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/block/block-copy.c b/block/block-copy.c
> index 20068cd699..aca44b13fb 100644
> --- a/block/block-copy.c
> +++ b/block/block-copy.c
> @@ -39,29 +39,62 @@ static BlockCopyInFlightReq *block_copy_find_inflight_req(BlockCopyState *s,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> -static void coroutine_fn block_copy_wait_inflight_reqs(BlockCopyState *s,
> - int64_t offset,
> - int64_t bytes)
> +/*
> + * If there are no intersecting requests return false. Otherwise, wait for the
> + * first found intersecting request to finish and return true.
> + */
> +static bool coroutine_fn block_copy_wait_one(BlockCopyState *s, int64_t start,
> + int64_t end)
s/end/bytes/?
(And maybe s/start/offset/, too)
> {
> - BlockCopyInFlightReq *req;
> + BlockCopyInFlightReq *req = block_copy_find_inflight_req(s, start, end);
>
> - while ((req = block_copy_find_inflight_req(s, offset, bytes))) {
> - qemu_co_queue_wait(&req->wait_queue, NULL);
> + if (!req) {
> + return false;
> }
> +
> + qemu_co_queue_wait(&req->wait_queue, NULL);
> +
> + return true;
> }
>
> +/* Called only on full-dirty region */
> static void block_copy_inflight_req_begin(BlockCopyState *s,
> BlockCopyInFlightReq *req,
> int64_t offset, int64_t bytes)
> {
> + assert(!block_copy_find_inflight_req(s, offset, bytes));
> +
> + bdrv_reset_dirty_bitmap(s->copy_bitmap, offset, bytes);
> +
> req->offset = offset;
> req->bytes = bytes;
> qemu_co_queue_init(&req->wait_queue);
> QLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&s->inflight_reqs, req, list);
> }
>
> -static void coroutine_fn block_copy_inflight_req_end(BlockCopyInFlightReq *req)
> +static void coroutine_fn block_copy_inflight_req_shrink(BlockCopyState *s,
> + BlockCopyInFlightReq *req, int64_t new_bytes)
It took me a while to understand that this is operation drops the tail
of the request. I think there should be a comment on this.
(I thought it would successively drop the head after each copy, and so I
was wondering why the code didn’t match that.)
> {
> + if (new_bytes == req->bytes) {
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + assert(new_bytes > 0 && new_bytes < req->bytes);
> +
> + bdrv_set_dirty_bitmap(s->copy_bitmap,
> + req->offset + new_bytes, req->bytes - new_bytes);> +
> + req->bytes = new_bytes;
> + qemu_co_queue_restart_all(&req->wait_queue);
> +}
> +
> +static void coroutine_fn block_copy_inflight_req_end(BlockCopyState *s,
> + BlockCopyInFlightReq *req,
> + int ret)
> +{
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + bdrv_set_dirty_bitmap(s->copy_bitmap, req->offset, req->bytes);
> + }
> QLIST_REMOVE(req, list);
> qemu_co_queue_restart_all(&req->wait_queue);
> }
> @@ -344,12 +377,19 @@ int64_t block_copy_reset_unallocated(BlockCopyState *s,
> return ret;
> }
>
> -int coroutine_fn block_copy(BlockCopyState *s,
> - int64_t offset, uint64_t bytes,
> - bool *error_is_read)
> +/*
> + * block_copy_dirty_clusters
> + *
> + * Copy dirty clusters in @start/@bytes range.
> + * Returns 1 if dirty clusters found and successfully copied, 0 if no dirty
> + * clusters found and -errno on failure.
> + */
> +static int coroutine_fn block_copy_dirty_clusters(BlockCopyState *s,
> + int64_t offset, int64_t bytes,
> + bool *error_is_read)
> {
> int ret = 0;
> - BlockCopyInFlightReq req;
> + bool found_dirty = false;
>
> /*
> * block_copy() user is responsible for keeping source and target in same
> @@ -361,10 +401,8 @@ int coroutine_fn block_copy(BlockCopyState *s,
> assert(QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(offset, s->cluster_size));
> assert(QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(bytes, s->cluster_size));
>
> - block_copy_wait_inflight_reqs(s, offset, bytes);
> - block_copy_inflight_req_begin(s, &req, offset, bytes);
> -
> while (bytes) {
> + BlockCopyInFlightReq req;
> int64_t next_zero, cur_bytes, status_bytes;
>
> if (!bdrv_dirty_bitmap_get(s->copy_bitmap, offset)) {
> @@ -374,6 +412,8 @@ int coroutine_fn block_copy(BlockCopyState *s,
> continue; /* already copied */
> }
>
> + found_dirty = true;
> +
> cur_bytes = MIN(bytes, s->copy_size);
>
> next_zero = bdrv_dirty_bitmap_next_zero(s->copy_bitmap, offset,
> @@ -383,10 +423,12 @@ int coroutine_fn block_copy(BlockCopyState *s,
> assert(next_zero < offset + cur_bytes); /* no need to do MIN() */
> cur_bytes = next_zero - offset;
> }
> + block_copy_inflight_req_begin(s, &req, offset, cur_bytes);
>
> ret = block_copy_block_status(s, offset, cur_bytes, &status_bytes);
> + block_copy_inflight_req_shrink(s, &req, status_bytes);
block_copy_inflight_req_shrink() asserts that status_bytes <= cur_bytes.
That isn’t necessarily correct, as block_copy_block_status() rounds up
on the last cluster. So this should use the same MIN() as for the
cur_bytes update after the next block.
Would it make sense to move the block_copy_inflight_req_shrink() there
and pass the updated cur_bytes to it?
> if (s->skip_unallocated && !(ret & BDRV_BLOCK_ALLOCATED)) {
> - bdrv_reset_dirty_bitmap(s->copy_bitmap, offset, status_bytes);
> + block_copy_inflight_req_end(s, &req, 0);
> s->progress_reset_callback(s->progress_opaque);
> trace_block_copy_skip_range(s, offset, status_bytes);
> offset += status_bytes;
> @@ -398,15 +440,13 @@ int coroutine_fn block_copy(BlockCopyState *s,
>
> trace_block_copy_process(s, offset);
>
> - bdrv_reset_dirty_bitmap(s->copy_bitmap, offset, cur_bytes);
> -
> co_get_from_shres(s->mem, cur_bytes);
> ret = block_copy_do_copy(s, offset, cur_bytes, ret & BDRV_BLOCK_ZERO,
> error_is_read);
> co_put_to_shres(s->mem, cur_bytes);
> + block_copy_inflight_req_end(s, &req, ret);
> if (ret < 0) {
> - bdrv_set_dirty_bitmap(s->copy_bitmap, offset, cur_bytes);
> - break;
> + return ret;
> }
>
> s->progress_bytes_callback(cur_bytes, s->progress_opaque);
> @@ -414,7 +454,41 @@ int coroutine_fn block_copy(BlockCopyState *s,
> bytes -= cur_bytes;
> }
>
> - block_copy_inflight_req_end(&req);
> + return found_dirty;
> +}
>
> - return ret;
> +int coroutine_fn block_copy(BlockCopyState *s, int64_t start, uint64_t bytes,
> + bool *error_is_read)
> +{
> + while (true) {
> + int ret = block_copy_dirty_clusters(s, start, bytes, error_is_read);
> +
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + /*
> + * IO operation failed, which means the whole block_copy request
> + * failed.
> + */
> + return ret;
> + }
> + if (ret) {
> + /*
> + * Something was copied, which means that there were yield points
> + * and some new dirty bits may appered (due to failed parallel
s/appered/have appeared/
> + * block-copy requests).
> + */
> + continue;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Here ret == 0, which means that there is no dirty clusters in
> + * requested region.
> + */
> +
> + if (!block_copy_wait_one(s, start, bytes)) {
> + /* No dirty bits and nothing to wait: the whole request is done */
Wouldn’t it make more sense to keep block_copy_wait_one() a loop (i.e.,
keep it as block_copy_wait_inflight_reqs()) that returns whether it
waited or not? Because I suppose if we had to wait for anything, we
might as well wait for everything in the range.
> + break;
> + }
> + }
Continuing my loud thought from the beginning, I would have written this
as a tail-recursive function to stress that this isn’t really a
(potentially expensive) loop but more of a re-check to be sure.
(i.e.
int ret = block_copy_dirty...();
if (ret < 0) {
return ret;
}
if (ret || block_copy_wait_one()) {
/* Something might have changed, re-check */
return block_copy();
}
/* Done */
return 0;
)
But who cares.
Max
> +
> + return 0;
> }
>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-17 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-27 18:08 [PATCH v2 for-5.0 0/7] block-copy improvements: part I Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2019-11-27 18:08 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] block/block-copy: specialcase first copy_range request Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-29 7:38 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-02-07 17:28 ` Max Reitz
2020-02-08 12:32 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2019-11-27 18:08 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] block/block-copy: use block_status Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-29 9:12 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-02-07 17:46 ` Max Reitz
2020-02-08 12:25 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-02-17 11:48 ` Max Reitz
2019-11-27 18:08 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] block/block-copy: factor out block_copy_find_inflight_req Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-29 9:25 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-02-07 17:50 ` Max Reitz
2019-11-27 18:08 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] block/block-copy: refactor interfaces to use bytes instead of end Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-29 17:12 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-02-05 11:36 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-02-07 18:01 ` Max Reitz
2020-02-08 12:55 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2019-11-27 18:08 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] block/block-copy: rename start to offset in interfaces Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-29 17:37 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-02-07 18:04 ` Max Reitz
2019-11-27 18:08 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] block/block-copy: reduce intersecting request lock Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-29 20:05 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-01-30 13:45 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-30 16:24 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-01-30 17:09 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-30 18:00 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-01-30 15:53 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-01-30 16:05 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-02-17 13:38 ` Max Reitz [this message]
2020-02-20 7:21 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-02-20 9:10 ` Max Reitz
2019-11-27 18:08 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] block/block-copy: hide structure definitions Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-30 18:58 ` Andrey Shinkevich
2020-02-17 14:04 ` Max Reitz
2020-02-20 7:26 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2019-12-19 9:01 ` [PATCH v2 for-5.0 0/7] block-copy improvements: part I Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-01-20 9:09 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
2020-02-07 18:05 ` Max Reitz
2020-02-08 10:28 ` Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
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=1ae71183-4732-fbe6-62d5-58252f01d2d6@redhat.com \
--to=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=den@openvz.org \
--cc=jsnow@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=vsementsov@virtuozzo.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).