9:32 a.m.
On 06/14/2018 12:10 AM, John Ferlan wrote:
On 06/08/2018 09:45 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> The point is to break QEMU_JOB_* into smaller pieces which
> enables us to achieve higher throughput. For instance, if there
> are two threads, one is trying to query something on qemu
> monitor while the other is trying to query something on agent
> monitor these two threads would serialize. There is not much
> reason for that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com>
> ---
> src/qemu/THREADS.txt | 62 +++++++++++++++++--
> src/qemu/qemu_domain.c | 163 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> src/qemu/qemu_domain.h | 12 ++++
> 3 files changed, 200 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
Looked at THREADS.txt before reading any code in order to get a sense
for what's being done... I won't go back after reading the code so that
you get a sense of how someone not knowing what's going on views things.
So when reading comments here - just take them with that in mind. I have
a feeling my mind/thoughts will change later on ;-).
> diff --git a/src/qemu/THREADS.txt b/src/qemu/THREADS.txt
> index 7243161fe3..6219f46a81 100644
> --- a/src/qemu/THREADS.txt
> +++ b/src/qemu/THREADS.txt
> @@ -51,8 +51,8 @@ There are a number of locks on various objects
> Since virDomainObjPtr lock must not be held during sleeps, the job
> conditions provide additional protection for code making updates.
>
> - QEMU driver uses two kinds of job conditions: asynchronous and
> - normal.
> + QEMU driver uses three kinds of job conditions: asynchronous, agent
> + and normal.
>
> Asynchronous job condition is used for long running jobs (such as
> migration) that consist of several monitor commands and it is
> @@ -69,9 +69,15 @@ There are a number of locks on various objects
> it needs to wait until the asynchronous job ends and try to acquire
> the job again.
>
> + Agent job condition is then used when thread wishes to talk to qemu
s/then//
s/when thread/when the thread/
s/to qemu/to the qemu/
> + agent monitor. It is possible to acquire just agent job
> + (qemuDomainObjBeginAgentJob), or only normal job
> + (qemuDomainObjBeginJob) or both at the same time
> + (qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithAgent).
> +
Oh this seems like it's going to be tricky... How does one choose which
to use.
By reading further. There are examples which make it clear.
At least w/ async you know it's a long running job and normal is
everything else.
Not really. How long must a job be to be considered long running? You
(as reader) don't know at this point so you carry on reading and
examples make it all clear.
But okay, I can try to expand the description.
Now you have category 3 agent specific - at this point
I'm not sure you really want to mix normal and agent. If the
purpose of
the series is to extricate agent job from normal job, then mixing when
it's convenient leads to speculation of what misunderstandings will
occur for future consumers.
Sometimes an API accesses both monitor AND agent. In this case it needs
to grab both types of jobs.
Because of the text for "Normal job condition is used by all other
jobs", I wonder if the agent job description should go above Normal job;
otherwise, perhaps it'd be best to distinguish "qemu monitor" jobs in
the normal description.
> Immediately after acquiring the virDomainObjPtr lock, any method
> - which intends to update state must acquire either asynchronous or
> - normal job condition. The virDomainObjPtr lock is released while
> + which intends to update state must acquire asynchronous, normal or
> + agent job condition. The virDomainObjPtr lock is released while
There is no agent job condition, yet. And how on earth do you do both
agent and normal?
There's a difference between "job condition" and pthread_cond_t. What
this paragraph understands as "job condition" is qemuDomainJob really.
And in the second hunk of my patch I'm enumerating all three ways how to
acquire jobs.
I'll drop "condition" word which is apparently confusing.
> blocking on these condition variables. Once the job condition is
> acquired, a method can safely release the virDomainObjPtr lock
> whenever it hits a piece of code which may sleep/wait, and
> @@ -132,6 +138,30 @@ To acquire the normal job condition
>
>
>
> +To acquire the agent job condition
> +
> + qemuDomainObjBeginAgentJob()
> + - Waits until there is no other agent job set
So no agent job before starting, but...
> + - Sets job.agentActive tp the job type
> +
> + qemuDomainObjEndAgentJob()
> + - Sets job.agentActive to 0
> + - Signals on job.cond condition
... we signal on job.cond even though we didn't necessarily obtain?
Yes. I don't see the problem here.
> +
> +
> +
> +To acquire both normal and agent job condition
> +
> + qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithAgent()
> + - Waits until there is no normal and no agent job set
> + - Sets both job.active and job.agentActive with required job types
> +
> + qemuDomainObjEndJobWithAgent()
> + - Sets both job.active and job.agentActive to 0
> + - Signals on job.cond condition
> +
> +
> +
> To acquire the asynchronous job condition
>
> qemuDomainObjBeginAsyncJob()
> @@ -247,6 +277,30 @@ Design patterns
> virDomainObjEndAPI(&obj);
>
>
> + * Invoking an agent command on a virDomainObjPtr
> +
> + virDomainObjPtr obj;
> + qemuAgentPtr agent;
> +
> + obj = qemuDomObjFromDomain(dom);
> +
> + qemuDomainObjBeginAgentJob(obj, QEMU_JOB_TYPE);
> +
> + ...do prep work...
> +
> + if (!qemuDomainAgentAvailable(obj, true))
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> + agent = qemuDomainObjEnterAgent(obj);
> + qemuAgentXXXX(agent, ..);
> + qemuDomainObjExitAgent(obj, agent);
> +
> + ...do final work...
> +
> + qemuDomainObjEndAgentJob(obj);
> + virDomainObjEndAPI(&obj);
> +
> +
Can you add a using a JobWithAgent example?
Okay.
> * Running asynchronous job
>
> virDomainObjPtr obj;
> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_domain.c b/src/qemu/qemu_domain.c
> index b8e34c1c2c..09404f6569 100644
> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_domain.c
> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_domain.c
> @@ -319,6 +319,17 @@ qemuDomainObjResetJob(qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv)
> job->started = 0;
> }
>
Two empty lines (multiple occurrences w/ new functions).>
> +static void
> +qemuDomainObjResetAgentJob(qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv)
> +{
> + qemuDomainJobObjPtr job = &priv->job;
> +
> + job->agentActive = QEMU_AGENT_JOB_NONE;
> + job->agentOwner = 0;
> + job->agentOwnerAPI = NULL;
> + job->agentStarted = 0;
> +}
> +
> static void
> qemuDomainObjResetAsyncJob(qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv)
> {
> @@ -6361,6 +6372,15 @@ qemuDomainJobAllowed(qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv,
qemuDomainJob job)
> return !priv->job.active && qemuDomainNestedJobAllowed(priv, job);
> }
>
> +static bool
> +qemuDomainObjCanSetJob(qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv,
> + qemuDomainJob job,
> + qemuDomainAgentJob agentJob)
> +{
> + return (job == QEMU_JOB_NONE || !priv->job.active) &&
> + (agentJob == QEMU_AGENT_JOB_NONE || !priv->job.agentActive);
> +}
> +
> /* Give up waiting for mutex after 30 seconds */
> #define QEMU_JOB_WAIT_TIME (1000ull * 30)
>
> @@ -6371,6 +6391,7 @@ static int ATTRIBUTE_NONNULL(1)
So you're competing with yourself with changes to this code from your
other series. Who merges first ;-)
Yes, I am aware of that :-) I've got only myself to blame though.
> qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
> virDomainObjPtr obj,
> qemuDomainJob job,
> + qemuDomainAgentJob agentJob,
> qemuDomainAsyncJob asyncJob)
> {
> qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv = obj->privateData;
> @@ -6383,16 +6404,15 @@ qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
> int ret = -1;
> unsigned long long duration = 0;
> unsigned long long asyncDuration = 0;
> - const char *jobStr;
>
> - if (async)
> - jobStr = qemuDomainAsyncJobTypeToString(asyncJob);
> - else
> - jobStr = qemuDomainJobTypeToString(job);
> -
> - VIR_DEBUG("Starting %s: %s (vm=%p name=%s, current job=%s async=%s)",
> - async ? "async job" : "job", jobStr, obj,
obj->def->name,
> + VIR_DEBUG("Starting job: job=%s agentJob=%s asyncJob=%s "
> + "(vm=%p name=%s, current job=%s agentJob=%s async=%s)",
> + qemuDomainJobTypeToString(job),
> + qemuDomainAgentJobTypeToString(agentJob),
> + qemuDomainAsyncJobTypeToString(asyncJob),
> + obj, obj->def->name,
> qemuDomainJobTypeToString(priv->job.active),
> + qemuDomainAgentJobTypeToString(priv->job.agentActive),
> qemuDomainAsyncJobTypeToString(priv->job.asyncJob));
Some random grumbling about splitting patches ;-)
>
> if (virTimeMillisNow(&now) < 0) {
> @@ -6416,7 +6436,7 @@ qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
> goto error;
> }
>
> - while (priv->job.active) {
> + while (!qemuDomainObjCanSetJob(priv, job, agentJob)) {
> VIR_DEBUG("Waiting for job (vm=%p name=%s)", obj,
obj->def->name);
> if (virCondWaitUntil(&priv->job.cond, &obj->parent.lock, then)
< 0)
> goto error;
Part of me says this check is ripe for some future coding error, but
logically AFAICT it works.
Well, the whole reason why any virCondWait() MUST be guarded with
while() loop is that pthread_cond_wait() can wake up anytime even
without anybody signalling it. This is taken from pthread_cond_wait(3p)
man page:
When using condition variables there is always a Boolean predicate
involving shared variables associated with each condition wait that is
true if the thread should proceed. Spurious wakeups from the
pthread_cond_timedwait() or pthread_cond_wait() functions may occur.
Since the return from pthread_cond_timedwait() or pthread_cond_wait()
does not imply anything about the value of this predicate, the
predicate should be re-evaluated upon such return.
Therefore, if there's a thread waiting for say agent job, and it gets
signalized by another thread ending monitor job, it is woken up but
realizes this is a "spurious" wake up and returns into virCondWait()
immediately.
IOW, yes we will get more wake ups here but it also enables us to grab
both jobs at the same time (without us having to worry about how to wait
on two pthread_cond at the same time).
> @@ -6427,32 +6447,48 @@ qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
> if (!nested && !qemuDomainNestedJobAllowed(priv, job))
> goto retry;
>
> - qemuDomainObjResetJob(priv);
> -
> ignore_value(virTimeMillisNow(&now));
>
> - if (job != QEMU_JOB_ASYNC) {
> - VIR_DEBUG("Started job: %s (async=%s vm=%p name=%s)",
> - qemuDomainJobTypeToString(job),
> - qemuDomainAsyncJobTypeToString(priv->job.asyncJob),
> - obj, obj->def->name);
> - priv->job.active = job;
> - priv->job.owner = virThreadSelfID();
> - priv->job.ownerAPI = virThreadJobGet();
> + if (job) {
> + qemuDomainObjResetJob(priv);
> +
> + if (job != QEMU_JOB_ASYNC) {
> + VIR_DEBUG("Started job: %s (async=%s vm=%p name=%s)",
> + qemuDomainJobTypeToString(job),
> + qemuDomainAsyncJobTypeToString(priv->job.asyncJob),
> + obj, obj->def->name);
> + priv->job.active = job;
> + priv->job.owner = virThreadSelfID();
> + priv->job.ownerAPI = virThreadJobGet();
> + priv->job.started = now;
> + } else {
> + VIR_DEBUG("Started async job: %s (vm=%p name=%s)",
> + qemuDomainAsyncJobTypeToString(asyncJob),
> + obj, obj->def->name);
> + qemuDomainObjResetAsyncJob(priv);
> + if (VIR_ALLOC(priv->job.current) < 0)
> + goto cleanup;
> + priv->job.current->status = QEMU_DOMAIN_JOB_STATUS_ACTIVE;
> + priv->job.asyncJob = asyncJob;
> + priv->job.asyncOwner = virThreadSelfID();
> + priv->job.asyncOwnerAPI = virThreadJobGet();
> + priv->job.asyncStarted = now;
> + priv->job.current->started = now;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (agentJob) {
> + qemuDomainObjResetAgentJob(priv);
> +
> + VIR_DEBUG("Started agent job: %s (vm=%p name=%s job=%s
async=%s)",
> + qemuDomainAgentJobTypeToString(agentJob),
> + obj, obj->def->name,
> + qemuDomainJobTypeToString(priv->job.active),
> + qemuDomainAsyncJobTypeToString(priv->job.asyncJob));
> + priv->job.agentActive = agentJob;
> + priv->job.agentOwner = virThreadSelfID();
> + priv->job.agentOwnerAPI = virThreadJobGet();
> priv->job.started = now;
> - } else {
> - VIR_DEBUG("Started async job: %s (vm=%p name=%s)",
> - qemuDomainAsyncJobTypeToString(asyncJob),
> - obj, obj->def->name);
> - qemuDomainObjResetAsyncJob(priv);
> - if (VIR_ALLOC(priv->job.current) < 0)
> - goto cleanup;
> - priv->job.current->status = QEMU_DOMAIN_JOB_STATUS_ACTIVE;
> - priv->job.asyncJob = asyncJob;
> - priv->job.asyncOwner = virThreadSelfID();
> - priv->job.asyncOwnerAPI = virThreadJobGet();
> - priv->job.asyncStarted = now;
> - priv->job.current->started = now;
So after reading the code and thinking about the documentation, IMO,
having agentJob use job.cond is confusing. Having JobWithAgent is even
more confusing. But it seems the code would work
Again, naming is hard. So any suggestions for better names of functions
are welcome. Basically what we need are names to cover the following
cases:
| needs monitor | doesn't need monitor |
+---------------+----------------------+
needs agent | X | X |
+---------------+----------------------+
doesn't need agent | X | 0 |
+---------------+----------------------+
I think what concerns me is there are 3 paths (I read patch 4) that
would seemingly indicate that by starting an agentJob we block a normal
domain job. In order to start one, IIUC both agentJob and normal job
must be 0.
No. I don't see that in code. What I see is the following predicate:
return (job == QEMU_JOB_NONE || !priv->job.active) &&
(agentJob == QEMU_AGENT_JOB_NONE || !priv->job.agentActive);
So if a thread wants just agentJob (in which case job == QEMU_JOB_NONE)
this predicate is true (= thread can set agent job) as long as
agentActive is unset. Similarly, if a thread wants just monitor job
(agentJob == QEMU_AGENT_JOB_NONE) this predicate allows that as long as
priv->job.active is 0. And finally, if thread wants both jobs, both
priv->job.active AND priv->job.agentActive have to be equal to zero.
And here you can see how having just one condition pays off: ALL threads
waiting are woken up, but only that one which can set the job will
successfully set it. The rest goes back to sleep.
That seems reasonable until one starts thinking about races
when there's a thread waiting for a JobWithAgent and a thread waiting
for one or the other. Combine that with the check "if (!nested &&
!qemuDomainNestedJobAllowed(priv, job))" which may now pass NONE for
@job if one of those threads was an agentJob.
I'm failing to see any race here, sorry. Can you give me an example
please?
> }
>
> if (qemuDomainTrackJob(job))
> @@ -6534,12 +6570,31 @@ int qemuDomainObjBeginJob(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
> qemuDomainJob job)
> {
> if (qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(driver, obj, job,
> + QEMU_AGENT_JOB_NONE,
> QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE) < 0)
> return -1;
> else
> return 0;
> }
>
This could use an intro comment regarding usage.
Oh, sure.
> +int qemuDomainObjBeginAgentJob(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
> + virDomainObjPtr obj,
> + qemuDomainAgentJob agentJob)
> +{
Read patch 3 and the following will make sense...
if (agentJob == QEMU_AGENT_JOB_MODIFY_BLOCK)
return qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(driver, obj,
QEMU_JOB_MODIFY,
agentJob,
QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE);
else
return qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(driver, obj,
QEMU_JOB_NONE,
agentJob,
QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE);
> + return qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(driver, obj, QEMU_JOB_NONE,
> + agentJob,
> + QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE);
> +}
> +
> +int qemuDomainObjBeginJobWithAgent(virQEMUDriverPtr driver,
> + virDomainObjPtr obj,
> + qemuDomainJob job,
> + qemuDomainAgentJob agentJob)
> +{
> + return qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(driver, obj, job,
> + agentJob, QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE);
> +}
> +
if you got with the above, then this one's not necessary.
No. It is necessary.
Michal