qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
Cc: Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Leonardo Bras <leobras@redhat.com>,
	Elena Ufimtseva <elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] migration/multifd: Remove channels_ready semaphore
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 10:35:02 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZTE+lmbvtYNDU80q@x1n> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sf676kxt.fsf@secure.mitica>

Fabiano,

Sorry to look at this series late; I messed up my inbox after I reworked my
arrangement methodology of emails. ;)

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 11:06:06AM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Fabiano Rosas <farosas@suse.de> wrote:
> > The channels_ready semaphore is a global variable not linked to any
> > single multifd channel. Waiting on it only means that "some" channel
> > has become ready to send data. Since we need to address the channels
> > by index (multifd_send_state->params[i]), that information adds
> > nothing of value.
> 
> NAK.
> 
> I disagree here O:-)
> 
> the reason why that channel exist is for multifd_send_pages()
> 
> And simplifying the function what it does is:
> 
> sem_wait(channels_ready);
> 
> for_each_channel()
>    look if it is empty()
> 
> But with the semaphore, we guarantee that when we go to the loop, there
> is a channel ready, so we know we donat busy wait searching for a
> channel that is free.
> 
> Notice that I fully agree that the sem is not needed for locking.
> Locking is done with the mutex.  It is just used to make sure that we
> don't busy loop on that loop.
> 
> And we use a sem, because it is the easiest way to know how many
> channels are ready (even when we only care if there is one when we
> arrive to that code).
> 
> We lost count of that counter, and we fixed that here:
> 
> commit d2026ee117147893f8d80f060cede6d872ecbd7f
> Author: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
> Date:   Wed Apr 26 12:20:36 2023 +0200
> 
>     multifd: Fix the number of channels ready
> 
>     We don't wait in the sem when we are doing a sync_main.  Make it
> 
> And we were addressing the problem that some users where finding that we
> were busy waiting on that loop.

Juan,

I can understand why send_pages needs that sem, but not when sync main.
IOW, why multifd_send_sync_main() needs:

        qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);

If it has:

        qemu_sem_wait(&p->sem_sync);

How does a busy loop happen?

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu



  reply	other threads:[~2023-10-19 14:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-12 14:06 [RFC PATCH v2 0/6] migration/multifd: Locking changes Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-12 14:06 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] migration/multifd: Remove channels_ready semaphore Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-19  9:06   ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-19 14:35     ` Peter Xu [this message]
2023-10-19 15:00       ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-19 15:46         ` Peter Xu
2023-10-19 18:28           ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-19 18:50             ` Peter Xu
2023-10-20  7:56               ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-19 14:55     ` Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-19 15:18       ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-19 15:56         ` Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-19 18:41           ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-19 19:04             ` Peter Xu
2023-10-20  7:53               ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-20 12:48                 ` Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-22 20:17                   ` Peter Xu
2023-10-12 14:06 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/6] migration/multifd: Stop checking p->quit in multifd_send_thread Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-19  9:08   ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-19 14:58     ` Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-19 15:19       ` Peter Xu
2023-10-19 15:19       ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-12 14:06 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] migration/multifd: Decouple control flow from the SYNC packet Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-19 10:28   ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-19 15:31     ` Peter Xu
2023-10-12 14:06 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/6] migration/multifd: Extract sem_done waiting into a function Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-12 14:06 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/6] migration/multifd: Stop setting 'quit' outside of channels Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-19 10:35   ` Juan Quintela
2023-10-12 14:06 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/6] migration/multifd: Bring back the 'ready' semaphore Fabiano Rosas
2023-10-19 10:43   ` 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=ZTE+lmbvtYNDU80q@x1n \
    --to=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=elena.ufimtseva@oracle.com \
    --cc=farosas@suse.de \
    --cc=leobras@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=quintela@redhat.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).