qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
To: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
	QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	"open list:Block layer core" <qemu-block@nongnu.org>,
	Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>, Fam Zheng <fam@euphon.net>,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>,
	Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2023 13:03:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZEpWd+273aIVZrRV@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3ba2f8b9-9818-6601-2247-7b0e20d7ab0d@proxmox.com>

Am 26.04.2023 um 16:31 hat Fiona Ebner geschrieben:
> Am 20.04.23 um 08:55 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> > 
> > 
> > Il gio 20 apr 2023, 08:11 Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com
> > <mailto:armbru@redhat.com>> ha scritto:
> > 
> >     So, splicing in a bottom half unmoored monitor commands from the main
> >     loop.  We weren't aware of that, as our commit messages show.
> > 
> >     I guess the commands themselves don't care; all they need is the BQL.
> > 
> >     However, did we unwittingly change what can get blocked?  Before,
> >     monitor commands could block only the main thread.  Now they can also
> >     block vCPU threads.  Impact?
> > 
> > 
> > Monitor commands could always block vCPU threads through the BQL(*).
> > However, aio_poll() only runs in the vCPU threads in very special cases;
> > typically associated to resetting a device which causes a blk_drain() on
> > the device's BlockBackend. So it is not a performance issue.
> > 
> 
> AFAIU, all generated coroutine wrappers use aio_poll. In my backtrace
> aio_poll happens via blk_pwrite for a pflash device. So a bit more
> often than "very special cases" ;)

Yes, it's a common thing for devices that start requests from the vcpu
thread when handling I/O (as opposed to devices that use an eventfd or
similar mechanisms).

> > However, liberal reuse of the main block layer AioContext could indeed
> > be a *correctness* issue. I need to re-read Fiona's report instead of
> > stopping at the first three lines because it's the evening. :)
> 
> For me, being called in a vCPU thread caused problems with a custom QMP
> function patched in by Proxmox. The function uses a newly opened
> BlockBackend and calls qemu_mutex_unlock_iothread() after which
> qemu_get_current_aio_context() returns 0x0 (when running in the main
> thread, it still returns the main thread's AioContext). It then calls
> blk_pwritev which is also a generated coroutine wrapper and the
> assert(qemu_get_current_aio_context() == qemu_get_aio_context());
> in the else branch of the AIO_WAIT_WHILE_INTERNAL macro fails.
> 
> Sounds like there's room for improvement in our code :/ I'm not aware
> of something similar in upstream QEMU.

Yes, even if it didn't crash immediately, calling blk_*() without
holding a lock is invalid. In many cases, this is the BQL. If you don't
hold it while calling the function from a vcpu thread, you could run
into races with the main thread, which would probably be very painful to
debug.

Kevin



  reply	other threads:[~2023-04-27 11:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-19 14:09 QMP (without OOB) function running in thread different from the main thread as part of aio_poll Fiona Ebner
2023-04-19 16:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2023-04-20  6:11 ` Markus Armbruster
2023-04-20  6:55   ` Paolo Bonzini
2023-04-26 14:31     ` Fiona Ebner
2023-04-27 11:03       ` Kevin Wolf [this message]
2023-04-27 12:27         ` Fiona Ebner
2023-04-27 14:36           ` Juan Quintela
2023-04-27 14:56             ` Peter Xu
2023-04-28  7:53               ` Fiona Ebner
2023-04-28  7:23             ` Fiona Ebner
2023-04-28  7:47               ` Juan Quintela
2023-04-28  8:30                 ` Kevin Wolf
2023-04-28  8:38                   ` Juan Quintela
2023-04-28 12:22                     ` Kevin Wolf
2023-04-28 16:54                       ` Juan Quintela
2023-05-02 10:03                         ` Fiona Ebner
2023-05-02 10:25                           ` Fiona Ebner
2023-05-02 10:35                             ` Juan Quintela
2023-05-02 12:49                               ` Fiona Ebner
2023-05-02 10:30                           ` Juan Quintela

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=ZEpWd+273aIVZrRV@redhat.com \
    --to=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=f.ebner@proxmox.com \
    --cc=fam@euphon.net \
    --cc=michael.roth@amd.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
    --cc=t.lamprecht@proxmox.com \
    /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).