From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Cc: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@gmail.com>,
Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>,
pbonzini@redhat.com, mst@redhat.com, mtosatti@redhat.com,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@tencent.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, wei.w.wang@intel.com,
jiang.biao2@zte.com.cn
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] migration: introduce decompress-error-check
Date: Thu, 3 May 2018 10:10:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180503021010.GC8239@xz-mi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180502145713.GE2679@work-vm>
On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 03:57:13PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Peter Xu (peterx@redhat.com) wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 06:40:09PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 04/27/2018 05:31 PM, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:15:37AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 04/26/2018 10:01 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> > > > > > On 04/26/2018 04:15 AM, guangrong.xiao@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > > From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@tencent.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > QEMU 2.13 enables strict check for compression & decompression to
> > > > > > > make the migration more robuster, that depends on the source to fix
> > > > > >
> > > > > > s/robuster/robust/
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Will fix, thank you for pointing it out.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > the internal design which triggers the unexpected error conditions
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2.13 hasn't been released yet. Why do we need a knob to explicitly turn
> > > > > > off strict checking? Can we not instead make 2.13 automatically smart
> > > > > > enough to tell if the incoming stream is coming from an older qemu
> > > > > > (which might fail if the strict checks are enabled) vs. a newer qemu
> > > > > > (the sender gave us what we need to ensure the strict checks are
> > > > > > worthwhile)?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Really smart.
> > > > >
> > > > > How about introduce a new command, MIG_CMD_DECOMPRESS_ERR_CHECK,
> > > > > the destination will do strict check if got this command (i.e, new
> > > > > QEMU is running on the source), otherwise, turn the check off.
> > > >
> > > > Why not we just introduce a compat bit for that? I mean something
> > > > like: 15c3850325 ("migration: move skip_section_footers",
> > > > 2017-06-28). Then we turn that check bit off for <=2.12.
> > > >
> > > > Would that work?
> > >
> > > I am afraid it can not. :(
> > >
> > > The compat bit only impacts local behavior, however, in this case, we
> > > need the source QEMU to tell the destination if it supports strict
> > > error check.
> >
> > My understanding is that the new compat bit will only take effect when
> > at destination.
> >
> > I'm not sure I'm thinking that correctly. I'll give some examples.
> >
> > When we migrate from <2.12 to 2.13, on 2.13 QEMU we'll possibly with
> > (using q35 as example, always) "-M pc-q35-2.12" to make the migration
> > work, so this will let the destination QEMU stop checking
> > decompressing errors. IMHO that's what we want so it's fine (forward
> > migration).
> >
> > When we migrate from 2.13 to <2.12, on 2.12 it'll always skip checking
> > decompression errors, so it's fine too even if we don't send some
> > compress-errored pages.
> >
> > Then, would this mean that the compat bit could work too just like
> > this patch? AFAIU the compat bit idea is very similar to current
> > patch, however we don't really need a new parameter to make things
> > complicated, we just let old QEMUs behave differently and
> > automatically, then user won't need to worry about manually specify
> > that parameter.
>
> I think you're saying just to wire it to the machine type for receive;
> that would work and would be fairly simple, although wouldn't provide
> the protection when going from new->new using an old machine type.
Yes. But actually we can still leverage the protection even with
new->new and old machine types - we just need to explicitly override
that parameter on both sides (instead of explicitly disalbe that on
old ones):
-M pc-q35-2.12 -global migration.x-error-decompress-check=true
After all the user already specified "-M pc-q35-2.12" explicitly
rather than using the default 2.13 one, I would consider he/she an
advanced user. Then IMHO it would be acceptable to make this explicit
too when the user really wants that.
(Will that happen a lot when people still use old machine types even
if they are creating new VMs?)
--
Peter Xu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-03 2:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-26 9:15 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] migration: introduce decompress-error-check guangrong.xiao
2018-04-26 9:19 ` Xiao Guangrong
2018-04-26 9:34 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2018-04-26 13:18 ` Xiao Guangrong
2018-04-26 14:01 ` Eric Blake
2018-04-27 3:15 ` Xiao Guangrong
2018-04-27 9:31 ` Peter Xu
2018-04-27 10:40 ` Xiao Guangrong
2018-05-02 3:03 ` Peter Xu
2018-05-02 14:57 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2018-05-03 2:10 ` Peter Xu [this message]
2018-04-27 11:29 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2018-04-28 6:13 ` Xiao Guangrong
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=20180503021010.GC8239@xz-mi \
--to=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=guangrong.xiao@gmail.com \
--cc=jiang.biao2@zte.com.cn \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=wei.w.wang@intel.com \
--cc=xiaoguangrong@tencent.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).