On 07/29/2011 02:59 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 07/29/2011 07:47 AM, Eric Blake Write:
Currently, we attempt to run sync job and async job at the same time. It means that the monitor commands for two jobs can be run in any order.
In the function qemuDomainObjEnterMonitorInternal(): if (priv->job.active == QEMU_JOB_NONE&& priv->job.asyncJob) { if (qemuDomainObjBeginNestedJob(driver, obj)< 0) We check whether the caller is an async job by priv->job.active and priv->job.asynJob. But when an async job is running, and a sync job is also running at the time of the check, then priv->job.active is not QEMU_JOB_NONE. So we cannot check whether the caller is an async job in the function qemuDomainObjEnterMonitorInternal(), and must instead put the burden on the caller to tell us when an async command wants to do a nested job. ---
My initial smoke testing shows that this fixes 'virsh managedsave', but I still have more testing to do before I'm convinced I got everything (for example, I need to test migration still).
I test this patch with save by virt-manager, and find that it will cause libvirt to be deadlock.
I'm seeing deadlock as well, in my further testing.
With this patch, we can ignore the return value of qemuDomainObjEnterMonitor(WithDriver), because these two functions always return 0. But we can not ignore the return value of qemuDomainObjEnterMonitorAsync(). If qemuDomainObjEnterMonitorAsync() failed, we do nothing in this function. So it's very dangerous to call qemuDomainObjExitMonitorWithDriver() when qemuDomainObjEnterMonitorAsync() failed.
I think this problem already exists before this patch.
First, a meta-question - is the approach of this patch better than the approach of your patch (that is, this patch was attempting to make the sync job condvar be the only condition used for starting a monitor command, and the async job condvar merely ensures that only one async job can be run at once and that an async monitor command corresponds to the current async job)? Or is this patch beyond hope with its deadlock problems, so that we should go with your patch (adding a new condvar in the monitor to allow both sync job and async job to request a monitor command, with the monitor doing the serialization)?
-static int ATTRIBUTE_NONNULL(1) +static int qemuDomainObjEnterMonitorInternal(struct qemud_driver *driver, bool driver_locked, - virDomainObjPtr obj) + virDomainObjPtr obj, + enum qemuDomainAsyncJob asyncJob) { qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv = obj->privateData;
- if (priv->job.active == QEMU_JOB_NONE&& priv->job.asyncJob) { + if (asyncJob != QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE) { + if (asyncJob != priv->job.asyncJob) {
When we recover a async job after livbirtd restart, priv->job.asyncJob is QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE, because we call qemuDomainObjRestoreJob() to reset priv->job in the function qemuProcessReconnect().
Can that be fixed with a tweak to qemuDomainObjRestoreJob()?
+ qemuReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR, + _("unepxected async job %d"), asyncJob); + return -1; + } if (qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(driver, driver_locked, obj, QEMU_JOB_ASYNC_NESTED, QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE)< 0) return -1; if (!virDomainObjIsActive(obj)) { qemuReportError(VIR_ERR_OPERATION_FAILED, "%s", _("domain is no longer running")); return -1; }
if the domain is not active after calling qemuDomainObjBeginJobInternal(), we set priv->job.active to QEMU_JOB_ASYNC_NESTED, but we do not clear it and notify the other thread which is waiting priv->job.cond.
Good catch.
@@ -2424,7 +2430,8 @@ qemuProcessRecoverJob(struct qemud_driver *driver, reason == VIR_DOMAIN_PAUSED_SAVE) || reason == VIR_DOMAIN_PAUSED_UNKNOWN)) { if (qemuProcessStartCPUs(driver, vm, conn, - VIR_DOMAIN_RUNNING_UNPAUSED)< 0) { + VIR_DOMAIN_RUNNING_UNPAUSED, + job->asyncJob)< 0) {
As the above mentioned, we set priv->job.asynJob to QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE, and priv->job.active is QEMU_JOB_MODIFY. I think we can use QEMU_ASYNC_JOB_NONE instead of job->asyncJob safely.
I'll give it a shot. -- Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org