[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH 09/25] block/dirty-bitmap: add readonly field to

From: Max Reitz
Subject: Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH 09/25] block/dirty-bitmap: add readonly field to BdrvDirtyBitmap
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 17:53:42 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.0

On 2017-05-31 17:05, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
> 31.05.2017 17:44, Max Reitz wrote:
>> On 2017-05-31 16:29, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>>> 31.05.2017 16:43, Max Reitz wrote:
>>>> On 2017-05-30 08:50, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>>>>> Thank you for this scenario. Hmm.
>>>>> So, as I need guarantee that image and bitmap are unchanged,
>>>>> bdrv_set_dirty should return error and fail the whole write. Ok?
>>>> I don't know. That would mean that you couldn't commit to an image that
>>>> has a persistent auto-loading bitmap, which doesn't seem very nice
>>>> to me.
>>>> I'm not quite sure what to do myself. So first I'd definitely want the
>>>> commit operation to succeed. That means we'd have to automatically make
>>>> the bitmap non-readonly once we write to it. The "readonly" flag would
>>>> then be an "unchanged" flag, rather, to signify that the bitmap has not
>>>> been changed since it was loaded, which means that it does not need to
>>>> be written back to the image file.
>>>> Now the issue remains that if you modify a persistent bitmap that is
>>>> stored in an image file that is opened RO when it's closed, you
>>>> won't be
>>>> able to write the modifications back.
>>>> So in addition, I guess we'd need to "flush" all persistent bitmaps
>>>> (that is, write all modifications back to the file and set the
>>>> "unchanged" flag (you could also call it "dirty" and then mean the
>>>> opposite) for each bitmap) not only when the image is closed or
>>>> invalidated, but also when it is reopened read-only.
>>>> (block-commit reopens the backing BDS R/W, then writes to them, thus
>>>> modifying the dirty bitmaps, and finally reopens the BDS as read-only;
>>>> before that happens, we will have to flush the modified bitmap data.)
>>> Ok, understand.
>>> We need to consider also setting in_use flag in the image. We _must not_
>>> write to image with dirty bitmap,
>>> if in_use flag of this dirty bitmap is not set, as in case of something
>>> fail we will have image with wrong bitmap with
>>> unset in_use flag (which looks ok).
>> Right.
>>> I see two ways to handle it:
>>> variant 1:
>>> 1. readonly field stays as is (see v19, with normal errors, not only
>>> asserts)
>>> 2. immediately after reopening r/w we do "reopening bitmaps r/w", i.e.
>>> set in_use in the image and set BdrvDirtyBitmap.readonly = false
>>> 3. in reopen_prepare, if reopening r-o do "reopening bitmaps r-o", i.e.
>>> save them into the image and set BdrvDirtyBitmap.readonly = true
>> Sounds good, yes.
>>> variant 2:
>>> 1. instead of 'readonly' add 'dirty' field, set dirty to 0 for all
>>> bitmaps on create
>>> 2. before write/discard check this field in all related bitmaps, and if
>>> dirty=0 (and persistent=1), write IN_USE flag into the image first, set
>>> dirty=1, and only then do write. (if writing IN_USE=1 failed, fail the
>>> whole write)
>>> 3. in reopen_prepare, if reopening r-o do "reopening bitmaps r-o", i.e.
>>> save them into the image and set BdrvDirtyBitmap.dirty = 0
>> Works, too.
>> I think the second variant would the more "efficient" way (because you
>> only have to flush out dirty dirty bitmaps), but the first one would be
>> simpler and has the great advantage of not requiring a write to the
>> image file when you just want to set a bit in the in-memory dirty
>> bitmap. So I'd personally go for the first variant.
> Hmm, why not requiring? Both 1 and 2 do write in_use=1, but (1) do this
> on open/reopen, and (2) before the first write to the image.

Oh, I didn't read the "before write/discard". Yes, if you check it
before writing, then you won't have to set the flag through

> "set a bit in the in-memory..." - are you saying about not-persistent
> dirty bitmaps? In this case, of course, nothing should be written into
> the image, just set dirty=1.

No, I did mean persistent bitmaps, but bdrv_set_dirty() just sets the
bit in main memory, of course. It only gets written to the image later
(on reopen/close/invalidate).

Well, your choice. I think both will work. :-)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]