Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] tests/qtest: massively speed up migration-test

["Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 12:22:36PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 05:05:23PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 11:46:01AM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 02:24:00PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > > > The migration test cases that actually exercise live migration want to
> > > > ensure there is a minimum of two iterations of pre-copy, in order to
> > > > exercise the dirty tracking code.
> > > > 
> > > > Historically we've queried the migration status, looking for the
> > > > 'dirty-sync-count' value to increment to track iterations. This was
> > > > not entirely reliable because often all the data would get transferred
> > > > quickly enough that the migration would finish before we wanted it
> > > > to. So we massively dropped the bandwidth and max downtime to
> > > > guarantee non-convergance. This had the unfortunate side effect
> > > > that every migration took at least 30 seconds to run (100 MB of
> > > > dirty pages / 3 MB/sec).
> > > > 
> > > > This optimization takes a different approach to ensuring that a
> > > > mimimum of two iterations. Rather than waiting for dirty-sync-count
> > > > to increment, directly look for an indication that the source VM
> > > > has dirtied RAM that has already been transferred.
> > > > 
> > > > On the source VM a magic marker is written just after the 3 MB
> > > > offset. The destination VM is now montiored to detect when the
> > > > magic marker is transferred. This gives a guarantee that the
> > > > first 3 MB of memory have been transferred. Now the source VM
> > > > memory is monitored at exactly the 3MB offset until we observe
> > > > a flip in its value. This gives us a guaranteed that the guest
> > > > workload has dirtied a byte that has already been transferred.
> > > > 
> > > > Since we're looking at a place that is only 3 MB from the start
> > > > of memory, with the 3 MB/sec bandwidth, this test should complete
> > > > in 1 second, instead of 30 seconds.
> > > > 
> > > > Once we've proved there is some dirty memory, migration can be
> > > > set back to full speed for the remainder of the 1st iteration,
> > > > and the entire of the second iteration at which point migration
> > > > should be complete.
> > > > 
> > > > On a test machine this further reduces the migration test time
> > > > from 8 minutes to 1 minute 40.
> > > 
> > > The outcome is definitely nice, but it does looks slightly hacky to me and
> > > make the test slightly more complicated.
> > > 
> > > If it's all about making sure we finish the 1st iteration, can we simply
> > > add a src qemu parameter "switchover-hold"?  If it's set, src never
> > > switchover to dst but keeps the iterations.
> > 
> > For *most* of the tests, we want to ensure there are a minimum
> > of 2 iterations. For the XBZRLE test we want to ensure there are
> > a minimum of 3 iterations, so the cache gets  workout.
> > 
> > > Then migrate_ensure_non_converge() will be as simple as setting
> > > switchover-hold to true.
> > > 
> > > I am even thinking whether there can even be real-life use case for that,
> > > e.g., where a user might want to have a pre-heat of a migration of some VM,
> > > and trigger it immediately when the admin really wants (the pre-heats moved
> > > most of the pages and keep doing so).
> > > 
> > > It'll be also similar to what Avihai proposed here on switchover-ack, just
> > > an ack mechanism on the src side:
> > > 
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230530144821.1557-3-avihaih@nvidia.com
> > 
> > In general I strongly wanted to avoid adding special logic to the
> > migration code that makes it directly synchronize with the  test
> > suite, because once we do that I don't think the test suite is a
> > providing coverage of the real world usage scenario.
> 
> The problem is non-live is already not real world usage in most cases.  It
> seems we all agreed that it's the code paths to cover not real world usages
> in the tests, or maybe not?

The cases that i made run non-live are exercising code paths that
are only relevant during migration setup, so the non-live vs live
status is irrelevant to the code coverage attained for those tests.
Other remaining live tests give sufficient coverage for the live
scenario
 
> > IOW, if we add a switchover-ack feature, we should certainly have
> > *a* test that uses it, but we should not modify other tests because
> > we want to exercise the logic as it would run with apps that don't
> > rely on switchover-ack.
> > 
> > Also, this slow migration test is incredibly painful for people right
> > now, so I'd like to see us get a speed up committed to git quickly.
> > I don't want to block it on a feature proposal that might yet take
> > months to merge.
> 
> That'll be trivial, afaict.
> 
> I just worry that this patch will bring complexity to the test cases,
> that's another burden we need to carry besides QEMU itself.
> 
> If you want, I can try to prepare such a patch before this weekend, and if
> it's complicated enough and take more than next week to review feel free to
> go ahead with this one.
> 
> I understand the migration test issue was there for a long time.  But still
> to me it's important on which may be cleaner for the long term too.


With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|