From: Michael Roth <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Wenchao Xia <xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>,
Ping Fan Liu <pingfank@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Convert AioContext to Gsource sub classes
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:32:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130815163207.16563.45553@loki> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130815152320.16563.51609@loki>
Quoting Michael Roth (2013-08-15 10:23:20)
> Quoting Wenchao Xia (2013-08-13 03:44:39)
> > 于 2013-8-13 1:01, Michael Roth 写道:
> > > Quoting Paolo Bonzini (2013-08-12 02:30:28)
> > >>> 1) rename AioContext to AioSource.
> > >>> This is my major purpose, which declare it is not a "context" concept,
> > >>> and GMainContext is the entity represent the thread's activity.
> > >>
> > >> Note that the nested event loops in QEMU are _very_ different from
> > >> glib nested event loops. In QEMU, nested event loops only run block
> > >> layer events. In glib, they run all events. That's why you need
> > >> AioContext.
> > >
> > > Would it be possible to use glib for our nested loops as well by just
> > > setting a higher priority for the AioContext GSource?
> > >
> > > Stefan and I were considering how we could make use of his "drop
> > > ioflush" patches to use a common mechanism to register fd events, but
> > > still allow us to distinguish between AioContext and non-AioContext
> > > for nested loops. I was originally thinking of using prepare() functions
> > > to filter out non-AioContext events, but that requires we implement
> > > on GSource's with that in mind, and non make use of pre-baked ones
> > > like GIOChannel's, and bakes block stuff into every event source
> > > implementation.
> > >
> > Besides priority, also g_source_set_can_recurse() can help.
> > With a deeper think, I found a harder problem:
> > g_main_context_acquire() and g_main_context_release(). In release,
> > pending BH/IO call back need to be cleared, but this action can't
> > be triggered automatically when user call g_main_context_release().
>
> I don't understand why this is a requirement, gmctx_acquire/release ensure
> that only one thread attempts to iterate the main loop at a time. this
> isn't currently an issue in qemu, and if we re-implemented qemu_aio_wait()
> to use the same glib interfaces, the tracking of in-flight requests would
> be moved to the block layer via Stefan's 'drop io_flush' patches, which
> moves that block-specific logic out of the main loop/AioContext GSource
> by design. Are there other areas where you see this as a problem?
I think I understand better what you're referring to, you mean that
if qemu_aio_wait was called, and was implementated to essentially call
g_main_context_iterate(), that after, say, 1 iteration, the
iothread/dataplane thread might acquire the main loop and dispatch
block/non-block events between qemu_aio_wait() returned? The simple
approach would be to have qemu_aio_wait() call g_main_context_acquire/release
at the start end of the function, which would ensure that this never
happens.
>
> > For the above reason, I tend to think, maybe we should t wrap all of
> > Glib's mainloop into custom encapsulation, such as QContext, Add the
> > aio poll logic in q_context_release(). Use QContext * in every caller
> > to hide GMainContext *, so QContext layer play the role of clear
> > event loop API.
> >
> > > Priorities didn't cross my mind though, but it seems pretty
> > > straightfoward...
> > >
> > > AioContext could then just be a container of sorts for managing
> > > bottom-halves and AioContext FDs and binding them to the proper
> > > GMainContext/MainLoop, but the underlying GSources could
> > > still be driven by a normal glib-based mainloop, just with a specific
> > > priority in the nested case.
> > >
> > >>
> > >>> 2) Break AioSource into FdSource and BhSource.
> > >>> This make custom code less and simpler, one Gsource for one kind of
> > >>> job. It is not necessary but IMHO it will make things clear when add
> > >>> more things into main loop: add a new Gsource sub class, avoid to
> > >>> always have relationship with AioContext.
> > >>
> > >> But this is only complicating things work since users rely on both file-
> > >> descriptor APIs and bottom half APIs.
> > >
> > > Taking things a step further, maybe AioContext can stop being a
> > > block-specific construct, but actually be the "QContext" we've
> > > discussed in the past for managing multiple event loops. All
> > > the block stuff would be hidden away in the GSource priority.
> > >
> > > For instance,
> > >
> > > #ifndef _WIN32
> > >
> > > qemu_aio_set_fd_handler(fd, ...):
> > > aio_set_fd_handler(qemu_aio_context, fd, ..., QEMU_PRIORITY_BLOCK)
> > >
> > > qemu_set_fd_handler(fd, ...):
> > > aio_set_fd_handler(qemu_aio_context, fd, ..., G_PRIORITY_DEFAULT)
> > >
> > > #else
> > >
> > > qemu_add_wait_object(fd, ...):
> > > add_wait_object(qemu_aio_context, fd, ...)
> > >
> > > qemu_set_fd_handler(fd, ...):
> > > set_socket_handler(qemu_aio_context, fd, ..., G_PRIORITY_DEFAULT)
> > >
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > qemu_bh_schedule:
> > > bh_schedule(qemu_aio_context, ...)
> > >
> > > etc...
> > >
> > > I'll be sending patches this week for moving
> > > add_wait_object/qemu_set_fd_handler to GSources, the non-global ones use
> > > GMainContext * to specify a non-default thread/context, but can be easily
> > > changed, or we can just do aioctx->g_main_context at the call sites.
> > > There's some nice possibilities in using the former though: avoiding
> > > O(n) lookups for stuff like finding the GSource for a particular
> > > event/event type, for instance, by storing pointers to the GSource or
> > > some kind of hashmap lookup. But probably better to discuss that aspect
> > > with some context so I'll try to get those patches out soon.
> > >
> > >>
> > >>>>> More reasons:
> > >>>>> When I thinking how to bind library code to a thread context, it may
> > >>>>> need to add Context's concept into API of block.c. If I use AioContext,
> > >>>>> there will need a wrapper API to run the event loop. But If I got
> > >>>>> glib's GmainContext, things become simple.
> > >>
> > >> You already have it because AioContext is a GSource. You do not need
> > >> to expose the AioContext, except as a GSource.
> > >>
> > I think expose GmainContext * or QContext *, is better than
> > GSource *.
> >
> > int bdrv_read(GMainContext *ctx,
> > BlockDriverState *bs,
> > int64_t sector_num,
> > uint8_t *buf,
> > int nb_sectors)
> >
> > >> Paolo
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Wenchao Xia
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-15 16:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-10 3:24 [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Convert AioContext to Gsource sub classes Wenchao Xia
2013-08-10 8:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-08-12 6:46 ` Wenchao Xia
2013-08-12 7:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-08-12 17:01 ` Michael Roth
2013-08-13 8:44 ` Wenchao Xia
2013-08-15 15:23 ` Michael Roth
2013-08-15 16:32 ` Michael Roth [this message]
2013-08-16 7:15 ` Wenchao Xia
2013-08-16 8:12 ` Wenchao Xia
2013-08-20 9:59 ` Wenchao Xia
2013-08-20 17:54 ` Alex Bligh
2013-08-21 8:45 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2013-08-21 9:33 ` Wenchao Xia
2013-08-22 11:40 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2013-08-21 10:06 ` Alex Bligh
2013-08-10 10:15 ` Alex Bligh
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=20130815163207.16563.45553@loki \
--to=mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=aliguori@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pingfank@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@gmail.com \
--cc=xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.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).