From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02BDBC4332F for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:52:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ox5Ky-0004JI-NE; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 06:51:44 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ox5Kx-0004In-3v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 06:51:43 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ox5Kv-0000lO-Kb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 06:51:42 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1669031501; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=xfGwcF2uzM47hyPsYfsvLpsEDFQDVfkEs1W63LC1Pq4=; b=Cg61633eg+AR9YGcT+MIGSIMwew9sKvw24EgtGUjywBPlWBK7gYbWDmEzZPyMgYpH03Xvd B4zLWce8VPVAfeZmEb+Jj4dzBHsXuJ1oIMESoyqMDDVZYpFVyrbuG7lq+8agvwhqGkw7h6 2SZHBMiArQOTBb2WfmFtOKpFxvXbgmA= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-457-T0aAtlQnN3ifIYlfW8rzgQ-1; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 06:51:24 -0500 X-MC-Unique: T0aAtlQnN3ifIYlfW8rzgQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD5D486C04C; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:51:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.39.194.221]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 282862166B26; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 11:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 12:50:58 +0100 From: Kevin Wolf To: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito Cc: qemu-block@nongnu.org, Hanna Reitz , John Snow , Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , Eric Blake , Fam Zheng , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/11] block-copy: add missing coroutine_fn annotations Message-ID: References: <20221116122241.2856527-1-eesposit@redhat.com> <20221116122241.2856527-2-eesposit@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.6 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=kwolf@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Am 21.11.2022 um 09:51 hat Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito geschrieben: > > > Am 21/11/2022 um 09:32 schrieb Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito: > > > > > > Am 18/11/2022 um 20:05 schrieb Kevin Wolf: > >> Am 16.11.2022 um 13:22 hat Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito geschrieben: > >>> These functions end up calling bdrv_common_block_status_above(), a > >>> generated_co_wrapper function. > >>> In addition, they also happen to be always called in coroutine context, > >>> meaning all callers are coroutine_fn. > >>> This means that the g_c_w function will enter the qemu_in_coroutine() > >>> case and eventually suspend (or in other words call qemu_coroutine_yield()). > >>> Therefore we need to mark such functions coroutine_fn too. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito > >> > >> Ideally, we'd convert them to new wrappers bdrv_co_is_allocated() and > >> bdrv_co_block_status_above() instead of having to argue that they always > >> take the coroutine path in g_c_w. > > > > Ok so basically I should introduce bdrv_co_is_allocated, because so far > > in this and next series I never thought about creating it. > > Since these functions will be eventually split anyways, I agree let's > > start doing this now. > > Actually bdrv_is_allocated would be a g_c_w functions in itself, that > calls another g_c_w and it is probably called by functions that are or > will be g_c_w. I'm not sure if I understand. bdrv_is_allocated() is essentially a g_c_w function today, just indirectly. But we have callers that know that they are running in a coroutine (which is why you're adding coroutine_fn to them), so they shouldn't call a g_c_w function, but directly the coroutine version of the function. The only reason why you can't currently do that is that bdrv_is_allocated() exists as a wrapper around the g_c_w function bdrv_common_block_status_above(), but the same wrapper doesn't exist for the pure coroutine version bdrv_co_common_block_status_above(). All I'm suggesting is introducing a bdrv_co_is_allocated() that is a wrapper directly around bdrv_co_common_block_status_above(), so that the functions you're marking as coroutine_fn can use it instead of calling g_c_w. This should be about 10 lines of code. I'm not implying that you should convert any other callers in this patch, or that you should touch bdrv_is_allocated() at all. > Is this actually the scope of this series? I think switching this > specific function and its callers or similar will require a lot of > efforts, and if I do it here it won't cover all the cases for sure. > > Wouldn't it be better to do these kind of things in a different serie > using Paolo's vrc tool? I'm not sure what the scope of this series is, because you already do introduce new wrappers in other patches of the series. I assumed it's just to improve the situation a little, with no claim of being exhaustive. Finding and fully converting all callers might indeed be a job for something like vrc, but here I'm only looking at local consistency in functions where you're adding coroutine_fn. Kevin