From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: anthony@codemonkey.ws, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, laurent@vivier.eu
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] fix select(2) race between main_loop_wait and qemu_aio_wait
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 10:25:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F54868E.1040402@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F548263.1070905@siemens.com>
Il 05/03/2012 10:07, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
> > This is quite ugly. Two threads, one running main_loop_wait and
> > one running qemu_aio_wait, can race with each other on running the
> > same iohandler. The result is that an iohandler could run while the
> > underlying socket is not readable or writable, with possibly ill effects.
>
> Hmm, isn't it a problem already that a socket is polled by two threads
> at the same time? Can't that be avoided?
We still have synchronous I/O in the device models. That's the root
cause of the bug, I suppose.
> Long-term, I'd like to cut out certain file descriptors from the main
> loop and process them completely in separate threads (for separate
> locking, prioritization etc.). Dunno how NBD works, but maybe it should
> be reworked like this already.
Me too, I even made a very simple proof of concept a couple of weeks ago
(search for a thread "switching the block layer from coroutines to
threads"). It worked, though it is obviously not upstreamable in any way.
In that world order EventNotifiers would replace
qemu_aio_set_fd_handler, and socket-based protocols such as NBD would
run with blocking I/O in their own thread. In addition to one thread
per I/O request (from a thread pool), there would be one arbiter thread
that reads replies and dispatches them to the appropriate I/O request
thread. The arbiter thread replaces the read callback in
qemu_aio_set_fd_handler.
The problem is, even though it worked, making this thread-safe is
another story. I suspect that in practice it is very difficult to do
without resurrecting RCU patches.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-05 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-05 8:34 [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] fix select(2) race between main_loop_wait and qemu_aio_wait Paolo Bonzini
2012-03-05 9:07 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-03-05 9:25 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2012-03-05 14:24 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-05 14:30 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-03-05 15:14 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-05 16:14 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-03-05 17:35 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-06 9:01 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-03-05 14:30 ` Jan Kiszka
2012-03-05 17:39 ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-05 17:55 ` Jan Kiszka
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=4F54868E.1040402@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=laurent@vivier.eu \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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).