Am 23.06.2021 um 17:01 hat Max Reitz geschrieben:
As we have attempted before
(https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-01/msg06451.html,
"file-posix: Cache lseek result for data regions";
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-block/2021-02/msg00934.html,
"file-posix: Cache next hole"), this patch seeks to reduce the number of
SEEK_DATA/HOLE operations the file-posix driver has to perform. The
main difference is that this time it is implemented as part of the
general block layer code.
The problem we face is that on some filesystems or in some
circumstances, SEEK_DATA/HOLE is unreasonably slow. Given the
implementation is outside of qemu, there is little we can do about its
performance.
We have already introduced the want_zero parameter to
bdrv_co_block_status() to reduce the number of SEEK_DATA/HOLE calls
unless we really want zero information; but sometimes we do want that
information, because for files that consist largely of zero areas,
special-casing those areas can give large performance boosts. So the
real problem is with files that consist largely of data, so that
inquiring the block status does not gain us much performance, but where
such an inquiry itself takes a lot of time.
To address this, we want to cache data regions. Most of the time, when
bad performance is reported, it is in places where the image is iterated
over from start to end (qemu-img convert or the mirror job), so a simple
yet effective solution is to cache only the current data region.
(Note that only caching data regions but not zero regions means that
returning false information from the cache is not catastrophic: Treating
zeroes as data is fine. While we try to invalidate the cache on zero
writes and discards, such incongruences may still occur when there are
other processes writing to the image.)
We only use the cache for nodes without children (i.e. protocol nodes),
because that is where the problem is: Drivers that rely on block-status
implementations outside of qemu (e.g. SEEK_DATA/HOLE).
Resolves: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/307
Signed-off-by: Max Reitz <mreitz@redhat.com>
Since you indicated that you'll respin the patch, I'll add my minor
comments:
@@ -2442,9 +2445,58 @@ static int coroutine_fn
bdrv_co_block_status(BlockDriverState *bs,
aligned_bytes = ROUND_UP(offset + bytes, align) - aligned_offset;
if (bs->drv->bdrv_co_block_status) {
- ret = bs->drv->bdrv_co_block_status(bs, want_zero, aligned_offset,
- aligned_bytes, pnum, &local_map,
- &local_file);
+ bool from_cache = false;
+
+ /*
+ * Use the block-status cache only for protocol nodes: Format
+ * drivers are generally quick to inquire the status, but protocol
+ * drivers often need to get information from outside of qemu, so
+ * we do not have control over the actual implementation. There
+ * have been cases where inquiring the status took an unreasonably
+ * long time, and we can do nothing in qemu to fix it.
+ * This is especially problematic for images with large data areas,
+ * because finding the few holes in them and giving them special
+ * treatment does not gain much performance. Therefore, we try to
+ * cache the last-identified data region.
+ *
+ * Second, limiting ourselves to protocol nodes allows us to assume
+ * the block status for data regions to be DATA | OFFSET_VALID, and
+ * that the host offset is the same as the guest offset.
+ *
+ * Note that it is possible that external writers zero parts of
+ * the cached regions without the cache being invalidated, and so
+ * we may report zeroes as data. This is not catastrophic,
+ * however, because reporting zeroes as data is fine.
+ */
+ if (QLIST_EMPTY(&bs->children)) {
+ if (bdrv_bsc_is_data(bs, aligned_offset, pnum)) {
+ ret = BDRV_BLOCK_DATA | BDRV_BLOCK_OFFSET_VALID;
+ local_file = bs;
+ local_map = aligned_offset;
+
+ from_cache = true;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (!from_cache) {
Is having a separate variable from_cache really useful? This looks like
it could just be:
if (QLIST_EMPTY() && bdrv_bsc_is_data()) {
// The code above
} else {
// The code below
}
+ ret = bs->drv->bdrv_co_block_status(bs, want_zero, aligned_offset,
+ aligned_bytes, pnum,
&local_map,
+ &local_file);
+
+ /*
+ * Note that checking QLIST_EMPTY(&bs->children) is also done when
+ * the cache is queried above. Technically, we do not need to
check
+ * it here; the worst that can happen is that we fill the cache for
+ * non-protocol nodes, and then it is never used. However, filling
+ * the cache requires an RCU update, so double check here to avoid
+ * such an update if possible.
+ */
+ if (ret == (BDRV_BLOCK_DATA | BDRV_BLOCK_OFFSET_VALID) &&
+ QLIST_EMPTY(&bs->children))
+ {
Would it be worth asserting that local_map == aligned_offset, because
otherwise with a buggy protocol driver, the result from the cache could
be different from the first call without us noticing?