From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KzxSv-00049r-Ux
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:55:50 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KzxSu-00049F-NK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:55:49 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43300 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KzxSu-00048z-8Q
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:55:48 -0500
Received: from qw-out-1920.google.com ([74.125.92.146]:62069)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1KzxSt-00029e-QZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:55:48 -0500
Received: by qw-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 5so4631qwc.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:55:46 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4919C71E.2030509@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:55:42 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch] Fix block I/O hang.
References: <4919B46C.3040804@redhat.com> <4919B79A.5030402@codemonkey.ws>
	<4919C550.5020609@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4919C550.5020609@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>   
>> Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>     
>>>   Hi,
>>>
>>> $subject says all.
>>>
>>> please apply,
>>>   Gerd
>>>       
>> Under what circumstances?  posix_aio_read() is only invoked from a
>> select callback.  This means there should be data available to be read.
>>     
>
> Hmm, looked at the loop again a bit closer.
>
> First, the check for errno == EAGAIN is superfluous when the filehandle
> isn't in non-blocking mode.  It will not happen.
>
> Second, the check for errno == EINTR is superfluous too because the loop
> will retry the read() syscall anyway for *any* error.
>   

Yes, this all is.  I think the intention was to make it non-blocking so 
that the full queue could be drained to avoid superfluous calls to 
posix_aio_read() since it handles all outstanding ops at once.  However,

> Third, when called from a select callback it shouldn't block indeed.  It
> does though for me now and then when booting xen guests (with a big
> stack of xenner patches).  Doesn't reproduce reliable though.  Sprinkled
> in a printk (with rfd being non-blocking) and got a EAGAIN once, so it
> got called with rfd not having data.
>   

I think it would be good to root cause this.  AFAICT, it shouldn't block.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori


> cheers,
>   Gerd
>
>
>