From: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
To: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Cc: Jeff Cody <jcody@redhat.com>,
akong@redhat.com, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] active block commit bug?
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 20:55:35 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <538FDC27.3020607@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140605020906.GA10963@T430.nay.redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1859 bytes --]
On 06/04/2014 08:09 PM, Fam Zheng wrote:
>> Sounds like we have an off-by-one condition if empty files behave
>> differently from other files. We ought to fix that bug (not that your
>> normal guest will ever have a 0-length backing file, but this was what I
>> was trying to use for libvirt's probing of whether active commit is
>> supported)
>>
>
> Yes, agreed, this special case is only going to make management confused. I
> will send a patch to fix this.
Thanks.
>
> Eric, is this a good way to probe the active commit? I was expecting full
> instrospection of QMP could do it, but I don't know about the status of that
> piece of work. Amos, any ideas?
Introspection already missed qemu 2.0 when active commit was added; and
we're close enough to soft freeze for 2.1 that I'm guessing it will miss
2.1 as well :(
So yes, I'm experimenting with how to learn if active commit works by
seeing what error message differences I can trigger with minimum effort;
libvirt will cache what it learns so that it only has to ask once per
qemu binary/timestamp, then let the user know up front whether active
commit will work. Since there are existing qemu versions that have
active commit but not introspection, I'm stuck using this harder probe
to avoid a false negative for those older qemu. My other option is to
just wait for introspection, or even something intermediate like Jeff's
patch to make 'top' optional, and just declare qemu 2.0 active commit as
not working - but since it is only the special case of a 0-size file
(which is fairly unlikely for any real client use, and certainly
something I can avoid in the libvirt probing), it feels a bit harsh to
reject 2.0 just for this corner-case bug.
--
Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 604 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-05 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-04 22:55 [Qemu-devel] active block commit bug? Eric Blake
2014-06-05 0:12 ` Jeff Cody
2014-06-05 1:54 ` Eric Blake
2014-06-05 2:09 ` Fam Zheng
2014-06-05 2:55 ` Eric Blake [this message]
2014-06-05 3:07 ` Fam Zheng
2014-06-05 7:06 ` Markus Armbruster
2014-06-05 8:25 ` Kevin Wolf
2014-06-05 9:21 ` Markus Armbruster
2014-06-06 5:30 ` Amos Kong
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=538FDC27.3020607@redhat.com \
--to=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=akong@redhat.com \
--cc=famz@redhat.com \
--cc=jcody@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).