From: Jeff Cody <jcody@redhat.com>
To: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-block@nongnu.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, kwolf@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com,
mreitz@redhat.com, eblake@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Block layer complexity: what to do to keep it under control?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 01:30:06 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171129063006.GD18521@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171129035502.GD8889@lemon>
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:55:02AM +0800, Fam Zheng wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As we move forwards with new features in the block layer, the chances of tricky
> bugs happening have been increasing alongside - block jobs, coroutines,
> throttling, AioContext, op blockers and image locking combined together make a
> large and complex picture that is hard to fully understand and work with. Some
> bugs we've encountered are quite challenging already. Examples are:
>
> - segfault in parallel blockjobs (iotest 30)
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-11/msg01144.html
>
> - Intermittent hang of iotest 194 (bdrv_drain_all after non-shared storage
> migration)
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-11/msg01626.html
>
> - Drainage in bdrv_replace_child_noperm()
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-11/msg00868.html
>
> - Regression from 2.8: stuck in bdrv_drain()
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-04/msg02193.html
>
I agree, it seems the complexity is growing by quite a bit.
> So in principle, what should we do to make the block layer easy to understand,
> develop with and debug? I think we have opportunities in these aspects:
>
> - Documentation
>
> There is no central developer doc about block layer, especially how all pieces
> fit together. Having one will make it a lot easier for new contributors to
> understand better. Of course, we're facing the old problem: the code is
> moving, maintaining an updated document needs effort.
>
> Idea: add ./doc/deve/block.txt?
>
There are some bits of brilliance in what is already there; for instance,
devel/atomics.txt is very thorough. But I agree that a major piece missing
is an overall design document, that provides the "why" to the "what".
Even given the cost of maintaining a higher level design document, I
think your suggestion here is probably the one that can help mitigate the
complexity the most; the more we (developers) can keep a coherent design
model in mind, the better we are able to do your _other_ suggestions: create
effective tests, simplify code, and enhance debuggability.
> - Tests
>
> Writing tests is a great way not only to exercise code, verify new features
> work as expected and catch regression bugs, but also a way to show how the
> feature can be used. There is this trend that the QEMU user interface
> gradually moves from high level commands and args to small and flexible
> building blocks, therefore demostrating the usage in iotests is meaningful.
>
> Idea: Add tests to simulate how libvirt uses block layer, or how we expect it
> to. This would be a long term investment. We could reuse iotests, or create a
> new test framework specifically, if it's easier (for example, use docker/vm
> tests that just uses libvirt).
>
> Idea: Patchew already tests the quick group of iotests for a few
> formats/protocols, but we should really add it to "make check".
>
Perhaps higher level testing (like your example of how libvirt uses the
block layer) is a good candidate for avocado?
> - Simplified code, or more orthogonal/modularized architecture.
>
> Each aspect of block layer is complex enough so isolating them as much as
> possible is a reasonable approach to control the complexity. Block jobs and
> throttling becoming block filters is a good example, we should identify more.
>
> Idea: rethink event loops. Create coroutines ubiquitously (for example for
> each fd handler, BH and timer), so that many nested aio_poll() can be removed.
>
> Crazy idea: move the whole block layer to a vhost process, and implement
> existing features differently, especially in terms of multi-threading (hint:
> rust?).
>
> - Debuggability.
>
> Working with backtraces when coroutine is used is pretty hard, it would be
> nice if ./scripts/qemugdb/coroutine.py could work with core files (i.e.
> without a process to debug), and trace back to co->caller automatically.
>
IIRC, this used to work, right?
> It's always useful to dump block graph. Maybe we should add a helper function
> in block layer that dumps all node graphs in graphviz DOT format, and even
> make it available in QMP as x-dump-block-graph?
>
> Of course gdb scripts to dump various lists are also nice little things to
> have.
>
> Idea: write more ./scripts/qemugdb/<scriptlet>.py.
More qemugdb macros would be great, especially for dumping the block chain
and making coroutines less opaque.
-Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-29 6:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-29 3:55 [Qemu-devel] Block layer complexity: what to do to keep it under control? Fam Zheng
2017-11-29 6:30 ` Jeff Cody [this message]
2017-11-29 12:16 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-11-29 12:22 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-11-29 12:00 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-11-29 12:24 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-11-29 13:24 ` [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-block] " Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-11-29 13:41 ` [Qemu-devel] " Kevin Wolf
2017-11-29 19:58 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2017-11-30 9:47 ` Fam Zheng
2017-11-30 14:19 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-12-01 10:16 ` Fam Zheng
2017-12-01 14:08 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-12-01 15:00 ` Fam Zheng
2017-12-01 17:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2017-12-01 19:03 ` Peter Maydell
2017-12-04 10:41 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-12-01 19:27 ` Eric Blake
2017-12-04 10:16 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2017-12-04 10:32 ` Peter Maydell
2017-11-29 12:32 ` Daniel P. Berrange
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=20171129063006.GD18521@localhost.localdomain \
--to=jcody@redhat.com \
--cc=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=famz@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@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 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).