From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60441)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aY9Ul-0005ht-Ov
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:43:04 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aY9Uh-0006wM-Io
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:43:03 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]:35868)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1aY9Uh-0006wE-BK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:42:59 -0500
Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id g62so212693899wme.1
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 01:42:59 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
References: <1455894643-16280-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<20160223053926.GA23182@ad.usersys.redhat.com>
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <56CC299F.3040509@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:42:55 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160223053926.GA23182@ad.usersys.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] fixup! block-migration: acquire AioContext
	as necessary
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Fam Zheng <famz@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mst@redhat.com



On 23/02/2016 06:39, Fam Zheng wrote:
> BTW, could you also explain the blk_mig_lock() question (*) I had?
> 
> *: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-02/msg03317.html

Sorry, missed that:

> 
>> @@ -597,21 +627,28 @@ static void block_migration_cleanup(void *opaque)
>>  {
>>      BlkMigDevState *bmds;
>>      BlkMigBlock *blk;
>> +    AioContext *ctx;
>>  
>>      bdrv_drain_all();
>>  
>>      unset_dirty_tracking();
>>  
>> -    blk_mig_lock();
> 
> Why is it okay to skip the blk_mig_lock() for block_mig_state.bmds_list?

The bmds_list is not protected by blk_mig_lock:

    /* Written during setup phase.  Can be read without a lock.  */
    int blk_enable;
    int shared_base;
    QSIMPLEQ_HEAD(bmds_list, BlkMigDevState) bmds_list;
    int64_t total_sector_sum;
    bool zero_blocks;

block_migration_cleanup is called from qemu_savevm_state_cleanup, when
there can be no concurrency between the migration thread and the I/O
thread.  In fact the call of qemu_savevm_state_cleanup might as well be
moved out of the migration thread.

Paolo