Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH] mirror: Improve zero-write and discard with fragmented image

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 09/11/2015 17:04, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 06.11.2015 um 11:22 hat Fam Zheng geschrieben:
>> The "pnum < nb_sectors" condition in deciding whether to actually copy
>> data is unnecessarily strict, and the qiov initialization is
>> unnecessarily too, for both bdrv_aio_write_zeroes and bdrv_aio_discard
>> branches.
>>
>> Reorganize mirror_iteration flow so that we:
>>
>>     1) Find the contiguous zero/discarded sectors with
>>     bdrv_get_block_status_above() before deciding what to do. We query
>>     s->buf_size sized blocks at a time.
>>
>>     2) If the sectors in question are zeroed/discarded and aligned to
>>     target cluster, issue zero write or discard accordingly. It's done
>>     in mirror_do_zero_or_discard, where we don't add buffer to qiov.
>>
>>     3) Otherwise, do the same loop as before in mirror_do_read.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fam Zheng <address@hidden>
> 
> I'm not sure where in the patch to comment on this, so I'll just do it
> here right in the beginning.
> 
> I'm concerned that we need to be more careful about races in this patch,
> in particular regarding the bitmaps. I think the conditions for the two
> bitmaps are:
> 
> * Dirty bitmap: We must clear the bit after finding the next piece of
>   data to be mirrored, but before we yield after getting information
>   that we use for the decision which kind of operation we need.
> 
>   In other words, we need to clear the dirty bitmap bit before calling
>   bdrv_get_block_status_above(), because that's both the function that
>   retrieves information about the next chunk and also a function that
>   can yield.
> 
>   If after this point the data is written to, we need to mirror it
>   again.

With Fam's patch, that's not trivial for two reasons:

1) bdrv_get_block_status_above() can return a smaller amount than what
is asked.

2) the "read and write" case can handle s->granularity sectors per
iteration (many of them can be coalesced, but still that's how the
iteration works).

The simplest solution is to perform the query with s->granularity size
rather than s->buf_size.

Paolo

> * In-flight bitmap: We need to make sure that we never mirror the same
>   data twice at the same time as older data could overwrite newer data
>   then.
> 
>   Strictly speaking, it looks to me as if this meant we can delay
>   setting the bit until before we issue an AIO operation. It might be
>   more obviously correct to set it at the same time as the dirty bitmap
>   is cleared.