qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: anthony@codemonkey.ws, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
	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 17:14:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F54D866.30402@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F54CDFE.3030309@redhat.com>

On 03/05/2012 04:30 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 05/03/2012 15:24, Avi Kivity ha scritto:
> > On 03/05/2012 11:07 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 2012-03-05 09:34, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>> 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?
> > 
> > Could it be done simply by adding a mutex there?  It's hardly a clean
> > fix, but it's not a clean problem.
>
> Hmm, I don't think so.  It would need to protect execution of the
> iohandlers too, and pretty much everything can happen there including a
> nested loop.  Of course recursive mutexes exist, but it sounds like too
> big an axe.

The I/O handlers would still use the qemu mutex, no?  we'd just protect
the select() (taking the mutex from before releasing the global lock,
and reacquiring it afterwards).

> I could add a generation count updated by qemu_aio_wait(), and rerun the
> select() only if the generation count changes during its execution.
>
> Or we can call it an NBD bug.  I'm not against that, but it seemed to me
> that the problem is more general.

What about making sure all callers of qemu_aio_wait() run from
coroutines (or threads)?  Then they just ask the main thread to wake
them up, instead of dispatching completions themselves.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

  reply	other threads:[~2012-03-05 15:15 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
2012-03-05 14:24   ` Avi Kivity
2012-03-05 14:30     ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-03-05 15:14       ` Avi Kivity [this message]
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=4F54D866.30402@redhat.com \
    --to=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=laurent@vivier.eu \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --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).