Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] replay: introduce block devices record/replay

[Kevin Wolf]

Am 12.02.2016 um 09:33 hat Pavel Dovgalyuk geschrieben:
> > From: Kevin Wolf [mailto:address@hidden
> > Am 11.02.2016 um 12:00 hat Pavel Dovgalyuk geschrieben:
> > > > From: Kevin Wolf [mailto:address@hidden
> > > > Am 11.02.2016 um 07:05 hat Pavel Dovgalyuk geschrieben:
> > > > > > From: Kevin Wolf [mailto:address@hidden
> > > > > > Am 10.02.2016 um 13:51 hat Pavel Dovgalyuk geschrieben:
> > > > > > > However, I don't understand yet which layer do you offer as the 
> > > > > > > candidate
> > > > > > > for record/replay? What functions should be changed?
> > > > > > > I would like to investigate this way, but I don't got it yet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At the core, I wouldn't change any existing function, but introduce 
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > new block driver. You could copy raw_bsd.c for a start and then 
> > > > > > tweak
> > > > > > it. Leave out functions that you don't want to support, and add the
> > > > > > necessary magic to .bdrv_co_readv/writev.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Something like this (can probably be generalised for more than just
> > > > > > reads as the part after the bdrv_co_reads() call should be the same 
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > reads, writes and any other request types):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > int blkreplay_co_readv()
> > > > > > {
> > > > > >     BlockReplayState *s = bs->opaque;
> > > > > >     int reqid = s->reqid++;
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     bdrv_co_readv(bs->file, ...);
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     if (mode == record) {
> > > > > >         log(reqid, time);
> > > > > >     } else {
> > > > > >         assert(mode == replay);
> > > > > >         bool *done = req_replayed_list_get(reqid)
> > > > > >         if (done) {
> > > > > >             *done = true;
> > > > > >         } else {
> > > > > >             req_completed_list_insert(reqid, qemu_coroutine_self());
> > > > > >             qemu_coroutine_yield();
> > > > > >         }
> > > > > >     }
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > /* called by replay.c */
> > > > > > int blkreplay_run_event()
> > > > > > {
> > > > > >     if (mode == replay) {
> > > > > >         co = req_completed_list_get(e.reqid);
> > > > > >         if (co) {
> > > > > >             qemu_coroutine_enter(co);
> > > > > >         } else {
> > > > > >             bool done = false;
> > > > > >             req_replayed_list_insert(reqid, &done);
> > > > > >             /* wait synchronously for completion */
> > > > > >             while (!done) {
> > > > > >                 aio_poll();
> > > > > >             }
> > > > > >         }
> > > > > >     }
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Where we could consider changing existing code is that it might be
> > > > > > desirable to automatically put an instance of this block driver on 
> > > > > > top
> > > > > > of every block device when record/replay is used. If we don't do 
> > > > > > that,
> > > > > > you need to explicitly specify -drive driver=blkreplay,...
> > > > >
> > > > > As far, as I understand, all synchronous read/write request are also 
> > > > > passed
> > > > > through this coroutines layer.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, all read/write requests go through the same function internally, no
> > > > matter which external interface was used.
> > > >
> > > > > It means that every disk access in replay phase should match the 
> > > > > recording phase.
> > > >
> > > > Right. If I'm not mistaken, this was the fundamental requirement you
> > > > have, so I wouldn't have suggested this otherwise.
> > > >
> > > > > Record/replay is intended to be used for debugging and analysis.
> > > > > When execution is replayed, guest machine cannot notice analysis 
> > > > > overhead.
> > > > > Some analysis methods may include disk image reading. E.g., qemu-based
> > > > > analysis framework DECAF uses sleuthkit for disk forensics (
> > > > https://github.com/sycurelab/DECAF ).
> > > > > If similar framework will be used with replay, forensics disk access 
> > > > > operations
> > > > > won't work if we will record/replay the coroutines.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry, I'm not sure if I can follow.
> > > >
> > > > If such analysis software runs in the guest, it's not a replay any more
> > > > and I completely fail to see what you're doing.
> > > >
> > > > If it's a qemu component independent from the guest, then my method
> > > > gives you a clean way to bypass the replay driver that wouldn't be
> > > > possible with yours.
> > >
> > > The second one. qemu may be extended with some components that
> > > perform guest introspection.
> > >
> > > > If your plan was to record/replay only async requests and then use sync
> > > > requests to bypass the record/replay, let me clearly state that this is
> > > > the wrong approach: There are still guest devices which do synchronous
> > > > I/O and need to be considered in the replay log, and you shouldn't
> > > > prevent the analysis code from using AIO (in fact, using sync I/O in new
> > > > code is very much frowned upon).
> > >
> > > Why do guest synchronous requests have to be recorded?
> > > Aren't they completely deterministic?
> > 
> > Good point. I think you're right in practice. In theory, with dataplane
> > (i.e. when running the request in a separate thread) it could happen,
> > but I guess that isn't very compatible with replay anyway - and at the
> > first sight I couldn't see it performing synchronous requests either.
> > 
> > > > I can explain in more detail what the block device structure looks like
> > > > and how to access an image with and without record/replay, but first let
> > > > me please know whether I guessed right what your problem is. Or if I
> > > > missed your point, can you please describe in detail a case that
> > > > wouldn't work?
> > >
> > > You have understood it correctly.
> > > And what is the solution for bypassing one of the layers from component 
> > > that
> > > should not affect the replay?
> > 
> > For this, you need to understand how block drivers are stacked in qemu.
> > Each driver in the stack has a separate struct BlockDriverState, which
> > can be used to access its data. You could hook up things like this:
> > 
> >       virtio-blk              NBD server
> >     --------------           ------------
> >           |                        |
> >           v                        |
> >     +------------+                 |
> >     | blkreplay  |                 |
> >     +------------+                 |
> >           |                        |
> >           v                        |
> >     +------------+                 |
> >     |   qcow2    | <---------------+
> >     +------------+
> >           |
> >           v
> >     +------------+
> >     | raw-posix  |
> >     +------------+
> >           |
> >           v
> >     --------------
> >       filesystem
> > 
> > As you see, what I've chosen for the external analysis interface is just
> > an NBD server as this is the component that we already have today. You
> > could hook up any other (new) code there; the important part is that it
> > doesn't work on the BDS of the blkreplay driver, but directly on the BDS
> > of the qcow2 driver.
> > 
> > On the command line, it could look like this (this assumes that we don't
> > add syntactic sugar that creates the blkreplay part automatically - we
> > can always do that):
> > 
> >     -drive file=image.qcow2,if=none,id=img-direct
> >     -drive driver=blkreplay,if=none,image=img-direct,id=img-blkreplay
> >     -device virtio-blk-pci,drive=img-blkreplay
> 
> Are there any hints for driver with these options?
> I can't figure out how to create _open function for that.
> blkdebug driver seems similar, but it receives image name directly, without 
> referencing
> the lower level.

Actually, the 'image' option of blkdebug works like this. For example, I
just tried this commandline and it works:

    -drive file=/tmp/test.qcow2,if=none,id=img
    -drive driver=blkdebug,image=img,if=virtio

Just ignore the legacy part with 'x-image' and pass NULL as the filename
to bdrv_open_child().

Another driver that could be useful as an example is quorum.

Kevin