qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/32] qmp: Get rid of x-oob-test command


From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 05/32] qmp: Get rid of x-oob-test command
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2018 16:08:14 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0

On 07/02/2018 11:21 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
tests/qmp-test tests an out-of-band command overtaking a slow in-band
command.  To do that, it needs:

1. An in-band command that *reliably* takes long enough to be
    overtaken.

2. An out-of-band command to do the overtaking.

3. To avoid delays, a way to make the in-band command complete quickly
    after it was overtaken.

To satisfy these needs, commit 469638f9cb3 provides the rather
peculiar oob-capable QMP command x-oob-test:

* With "lock": true, it waits for a global semaphore.

* With "lock": false, it signals the global semaphore.

To satisfy 1., the test runs x-oob-test in-band with "lock": true.
To satisfy 2. and 3., it runs x-oob-test out-of-band with "lock": false.

Note that waiting for a semaphore violates the rules for oob-capable
commands.  Running x-oob-test with "lock": true hangs the monitor
until you run x-oob-test with "lock": false on another monitor (which
you might not have set up).

Having an externally visible QMP command that may hang the monitor is
not nice.  Let's apply a little more ingenuity to the problem.  Idea:
have an existing command block on reading a FIFO special file, unblock
it by opening the FIFO for writing.

For 1., use

     {"execute": "blockdev-add",  "id": ID1,
      "arguments": {
         "driver": "blkdebug", "node-name": ID1, "config": FIFO,
         "image": { "driver": "null-co"}}}

I like it!


where ID1 is an arbitrary string, and FIFO is the name of the FIFO.

For 2., use

     {"execute": "migrate-pause", "id": ID2, "control": {"run-oob": true}}

where ID2 is a different arbitrary string.  Since there's no migration
to pause, the command will fail, but that's fine.

Maybe add:

that's fine, since instant failure is still a test of out-of-band responses overtaking in-band commands.


For 3., open FIFO for writing.

Drop QMP command x-oob-test.

Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <address@hidden>
---
  qapi/misc.json   | 18 ----------
  qmp.c            | 16 ---------
  tests/qmp-test.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
  3 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)

And in about the same lines of code.

Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>

+++ b/tests/qmp-test.c
@@ -135,16 +135,64 @@ static void test_qmp_protocol(void)
      qtest_quit(qts);
  }
-/* Tests for out-of-band support. */
+/* Out-of-band tests */
+
+char tmpdir[] = "/tmp/qmp-test-XXXXXX";
+char *fifo_name;
+
+static void setup_blocking_cmd(void)
+{
+    if (!mkdtemp(tmpdir)) {
+        g_error("mkdtemp: %s", strerror(errno));
+    }
+    fifo_name = g_strdup_printf("%s/fifo", tmpdir);
+    g_assert(!mkfifo(fifo_name, 0666));

g_assert() can be compiled out; should the side-effect mkfifo() call be done separately from asserting that its return code is expected?


+
+static void send_oob_cmd(QTestState *s, const char *id)
+{
+    qtest_async_qmp(s, "{ 'execute': 'migrate-pause', 'id': %s,"
+                    "  'control': { 'run-oob': true } }", id);
+}

Worth a comment here that we expect this to fail, and really only care that the response overtakes the in-band message?

With those nits addressed,
Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <address@hidden>

--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org



reply via email to

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