Re: [PATCH] migration: Move bitmap_mutex out of migration_bitmap_clear_dirty()

[Peter Xu]

On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:34:50AM +0000, Wang, Wei W wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 7, 2021 1:47 AM, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 02:53:27AM +0000, Wang, Wei W wrote:
> > > +       do {
> > > +            page_to_clear = start + (i++ << block->clear_bmap_shift);
> > 
> > Why "i" needs to be shifted?
> 
> Just move to the next clear chunk, no?
> For example, (1 << 18) pages chunk (i.e. 1GB).

But migration_clear_memory_region_dirty_bitmap() has done the shifting?

> 
> > 
> > > +            migration_clear_memory_region_dirty_bitmap(ram_state,
> > > +                                                       block,
> > > +
> > page_to_clear);
> > > +       } while (i <= npages >> block->clear_bmap_shift);
> > 
> > I agree with David that this should be better put into the mutex section, 
> > if so
> > we'd also touch up comment for bitmap_mutex.  Or is it a reason to 
> > explicitly
> > not do so?
> 
> clear_bmap_test_and_clear already uses atomic operation on clear_bmap.
> But it's also OK to me if you guys feel safer to move it under the lock.

I see, yes seems ok to be out of the lock.  Or we use mutex to protect all of
them, then make clear_bmap* helpers non-atomic too, just like dirty bmap.

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu