Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 12/24] virtio-blk: Functions for op blocker management

[Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3429 bytes --]

On 25.11.2015 16:57, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 09.11.2015 um 23:39 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
>> Put the code for setting up and removing op blockers into an own
>> function, respectively. Then, we can invoke those functions whenever a
>> BDS is removed from an virtio-blk BB or inserted into it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
> 
> Do you know of a case where this is observable?

Actually, no.

>                                                 I don't think you can
> change the medium of a virtio-blk device, and blk_set_bs() isn't
> converted to a wrapper around blk_remove/insert_bs() yet. If this patch
> is necessary to fix something observable, the latter is probably a bug.

So I guess that implies "Otherwise, this patch should be dropped"?

>> diff --git a/hw/block/dataplane/virtio-blk.c b/hw/block/dataplane/virtio-blk.c
>> index c42ddeb..4c95d5b 100644
>> --- a/hw/block/dataplane/virtio-blk.c
>> +++ b/hw/block/dataplane/virtio-blk.c
>> @@ -39,6 +39,8 @@ struct VirtIOBlockDataPlane {
>>      EventNotifier *guest_notifier;  /* irq */
>>      QEMUBH *bh;                     /* bh for guest notification */
>>  
>> +    Notifier insert_notifier, remove_notifier;
>> +
>>      /* Note that these EventNotifiers are assigned by value.  This is
>>       * fine as long as you do not call event_notifier_cleanup on them
>>       * (because you don't own the file descriptor or handle; you just
>> @@ -137,6 +139,54 @@ static void handle_notify(EventNotifier *e)
>>      blk_io_unplug(s->conf->conf.blk);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void data_plane_set_up_op_blockers(VirtIOBlockDataPlane *s)
>> +{
>> +    assert(!s->blocker);
>> +    error_setg(&s->blocker, "block device is in use by data plane");
>> +    blk_op_block_all(s->conf->conf.blk, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_RESIZE, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_DRIVE_DEL, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_BACKUP_SOURCE, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_CHANGE, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_COMMIT_SOURCE, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_COMMIT_TARGET, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_EJECT, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_EXTERNAL_SNAPSHOT,
>> +                   s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_INTERNAL_SNAPSHOT,
>> +                   s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_INTERNAL_SNAPSHOT_DELETE,
>> +                   s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_MIRROR, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_STREAM, s->blocker);
>> +    blk_op_unblock(s->conf->conf.blk, BLOCK_OP_TYPE_REPLACE, s->blocker);
>> +}
> 
> This makes me wonder: What do we even block here any more? If I didn't
> miss anything, it's only BLOCK_OP_TYPE_BACKUP_TARGET, and I'm not sure
> why this needs to be blocked, or if we simply forgot to enable it.

Well, even though in practice this wall of code doesn't make much sense,
of course it will be safe for potential additions of new op blockers.

And of course we actually don't want these blockers at all anymore...

Max


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]