qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vhost: fix a migration failed because of vhost


From: Michael S. Tsirkin
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vhost: fix a migration failed because of vhost region merge
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 18:52:56 +0300

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 03:24:27PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 12:46:13 +0100
> "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > * Igor Mammedov (address@hidden) wrote:
> > > On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 23:17:32 +0800
> > > Peng Hao <address@hidden> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > When a guest that has several hotplugged dimms is migrated, in
> > > > destination host it will fail to resume. Because vhost regions of
> > > > several dimms in source host are merged and in the restore stage
> > > > in destination host it computes whether more than vhost slot limit
> > > > before merging vhost regions of several dimms.  
> > > could you provide a bit more detailed description of the problem
> > > including command line+used device_add commands on source and
> > > command line on destination?  
> > 
> > (ccing in Marc Andre and Maxime)
> > 
> > Hmm, I'd like to understade the situation where you get merging between
> > RAMBlocks; that complicates some stuff for postcopy.
> and probably inconsistent merging breaks vhost as well
> 
> merging might happen if regions are adjacent or overlap
> but for that to happen merged regions must have equal
> distance between their GPA:HVA pairs, so that following
> translation would work:
> 
> if gva in regionX[gva_start, len, hva_start]
>    hva = hva_start + gva - gva_start
> 
> while GVA of regions is under QEMU control and deterministic
> HVA is not, so in migration case merging might happen on source
> side but not on destination, resulting in different memory maps.
> 
> Maybe Michael might know details why migration works in vhost usecase,
> but I don't see vhost sending any vmstate data.

We aren't merging ramblocks at all.
When we are passing blocks A and B to vhost, if we see that

hvaB=hvaA + lenA
gpaB=gpaA + lenA

then we can improve performance a bit by passing a single
chunk to vhost: hvaA,gpaA,lena+lenB

so it does not affect migration normally.

> 
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <address@hidden>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Wang Yechao <address@hidden>
> > > > ---
> > > >  hw/mem/pc-dimm.c | 2 +-
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/hw/mem/pc-dimm.c b/hw/mem/pc-dimm.c
> > > > index ea67b46..bb0fa08 100644
> > > > --- a/hw/mem/pc-dimm.c
> > > > +++ b/hw/mem/pc-dimm.c
> > > > @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ void pc_dimm_memory_plug(DeviceState *dev, 
> > > > MemoryHotplugState *hpms,
> > > >          goto out;
> > > >      }
> > > >  
> > > > -    if (!vhost_has_free_slot()) {
> > > > +    if (!vhost_has_free_slot() && runstate_is_running()) {
> > > >          error_setg(&local_err, "a used vhost backend has no free"
> > > >                                 " memory slots left");
> > > >          goto out;  
> > 
> > Even this produces the wrong error message in this case,
> > it also makes me think if the existing code should undo a lot of
> > the object_property_set's that happen.
> > 
> > Dave
> > > 
> > >   
> > --
> > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / address@hidden / Manchester, UK



reply via email to

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