graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Graph lock: rwlock to protect block layer graph manipulations (add/remove
|
|
|
|
* edges and nodes)
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Copyright (c) 2022 Red Hat
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
|
|
|
|
* modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
|
|
|
|
* License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
|
|
|
|
* version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
|
|
|
|
* but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
|
|
|
|
* MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
|
|
|
|
* Lesser General Public License for more details.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
|
|
|
|
* License along with this library; if not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
#ifndef GRAPH_LOCK_H
|
|
|
|
#define GRAPH_LOCK_H
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "qemu/osdep.h"
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
#include "qemu/clang-tsa.h"
|
graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "qemu/coroutine.h"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
|
|
|
* Graph Lock API
|
|
|
|
* This API provides a rwlock used to protect block layer
|
|
|
|
* graph modifications like edge (BdrvChild) and node (BlockDriverState)
|
|
|
|
* addition and removal.
|
|
|
|
* Currently we have 1 writer only, the Main loop, and many
|
|
|
|
* readers, mostly coroutines running in other AioContext thus other threads.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
|
|
|
|
* graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
|
|
|
|
* that go through the graph edges, reading
|
|
|
|
* BlockDriverState ->parents and->children.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* The writer (main loop) has an "exclusive" access, so it first waits for
|
|
|
|
* current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from
|
|
|
|
* entering while it has the exclusive access.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to
|
|
|
|
* access the graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph.
|
|
|
|
* In case it is, they go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer
|
|
|
|
* is done.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
|
|
|
|
* AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where is the
|
|
|
|
* reader, but only if there is one.
|
|
|
|
* As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
|
|
|
|
* balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock.
|
|
|
|
* This also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
|
|
|
|
* reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared counter
|
|
|
|
* so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
typedef struct BdrvGraphRWlock BdrvGraphRWlock;
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
/* Dummy lock object to use for Thread Safety Analysis (TSA) */
|
|
|
|
typedef struct TSA_CAPABILITY("mutex") BdrvGraphLock {
|
|
|
|
} BdrvGraphLock;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
extern BdrvGraphLock graph_lock;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* clang doesn't check consistency in locking annotations between forward
|
|
|
|
* declarations and the function definition. Having the annotation on the
|
|
|
|
* definition, but not the declaration in a header file, may give the reader
|
|
|
|
* a false sense of security because the condition actually remains unchecked
|
|
|
|
* for callers in other source files.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Therefore, as a convention, for public functions, GRAPH_RDLOCK and
|
|
|
|
* GRAPH_WRLOCK annotations should be present only in the header file.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
#define GRAPH_WRLOCK TSA_REQUIRES(graph_lock)
|
|
|
|
#define GRAPH_RDLOCK TSA_REQUIRES_SHARED(graph_lock)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* TSA annotations are not part of function types, so checks are defeated when
|
|
|
|
* using a function pointer. As a workaround, annotate function pointers with
|
|
|
|
* this macro that will require that the lock is at least taken while reading
|
|
|
|
* the pointer. In most cases this is equivalent to actually protecting the
|
|
|
|
* function call.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
#define GRAPH_RDLOCK_PTR TSA_GUARDED_BY(graph_lock)
|
|
|
|
#define GRAPH_WRLOCK_PTR TSA_GUARDED_BY(graph_lock)
|
|
|
|
|
graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* register_aiocontext:
|
|
|
|
* Add AioContext @ctx to the list of AioContext.
|
|
|
|
* This list is used to obtain the total number of readers
|
|
|
|
* currently running the graph.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
void register_aiocontext(AioContext *ctx);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* unregister_aiocontext:
|
|
|
|
* Removes AioContext @ctx to the list of AioContext.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
void unregister_aiocontext(AioContext *ctx);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* bdrv_graph_wrlock:
|
|
|
|
* Start an exclusive write operation to modify the graph. This means we are
|
|
|
|
* adding or removing an edge or a node in the block layer graph. Nobody else
|
|
|
|
* is allowed to access the graph.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Must only be called from outside bdrv_graph_co_rdlock.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* The wrlock can only be taken from the main loop, with BQL held, as only the
|
|
|
|
* main loop is allowed to modify the graph.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* This function polls. Callers must not hold the lock of any AioContext other
|
|
|
|
* than the current one.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
void bdrv_graph_wrlock(void) TSA_ACQUIRE(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA;
|
graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* bdrv_graph_wrunlock:
|
|
|
|
* Write finished, reset global has_writer to 0 and restart
|
|
|
|
* all readers that are waiting.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
void bdrv_graph_wrunlock(void) TSA_RELEASE(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA;
|
graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* bdrv_graph_co_rdlock:
|
|
|
|
* Read the bs graph. This usually means traversing all nodes in
|
|
|
|
* the graph, therefore it can't happen while another thread is
|
|
|
|
* modifying it.
|
|
|
|
* Increases the reader counter of the current aiocontext,
|
|
|
|
* and if has_writer is set, it means that the writer is modifying
|
|
|
|
* the graph, therefore wait in a coroutine queue.
|
|
|
|
* The writer will then wake this coroutine once it is done.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* This lock should be taken from Iothreads (IO_CODE() class of functions)
|
|
|
|
* because it signals the writer that there are some
|
|
|
|
* readers currently running, or waits until the current
|
|
|
|
* write is finished before continuing.
|
|
|
|
* Calling this function from the Main Loop with BQL held
|
|
|
|
* is not necessary, since the Main Loop itself is the only
|
|
|
|
* writer, thus won't be able to read and write at the same time.
|
|
|
|
* The only exception to that is when we can't take the lock in the
|
|
|
|
* function/coroutine itself, and need to delegate the caller (usually main
|
|
|
|
* loop) to take it and wait that the coroutine ends, so that
|
|
|
|
* we always signal that a reader is running.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
void coroutine_fn TSA_ACQUIRE_SHARED(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA
|
|
|
|
bdrv_graph_co_rdlock(void);
|
graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* bdrv_graph_rdunlock:
|
|
|
|
* Read terminated, decrease the count of readers in the current aiocontext.
|
|
|
|
* If the writer is waiting for reads to finish (has_writer == 1), signal
|
|
|
|
* the writer that we are done via aio_wait_kick() to let it continue.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
void coroutine_fn TSA_RELEASE_SHARED(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA
|
|
|
|
bdrv_graph_co_rdunlock(void);
|
graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* bdrv_graph_rd{un}lock_main_loop:
|
|
|
|
* Just a placeholder to mark where the graph rdlock should be taken
|
|
|
|
* in the main loop. It is just asserting that we are not
|
|
|
|
* in a coroutine and in GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
void TSA_ACQUIRE_SHARED(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA
|
|
|
|
bdrv_graph_rdlock_main_loop(void);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void TSA_RELEASE_SHARED(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA
|
|
|
|
bdrv_graph_rdunlock_main_loop(void);
|
graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 14:18:33 +01:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* assert_bdrv_graph_readable:
|
|
|
|
* Make sure that the reader is either the main loop,
|
|
|
|
* or there is at least a reader helding the rdlock.
|
|
|
|
* In this way an incoming writer is aware of the read and waits.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2022-12-07 14:18:35 +01:00
|
|
|
void GRAPH_RDLOCK assert_bdrv_graph_readable(void);
|
2022-12-07 14:18:33 +01:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* assert_bdrv_graph_writable:
|
|
|
|
* Make sure that the writer is the main loop and has set @has_writer,
|
|
|
|
* so that incoming readers will pause.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2022-12-07 14:18:35 +01:00
|
|
|
void GRAPH_WRLOCK assert_bdrv_graph_writable(void);
|
2022-12-07 14:18:33 +01:00
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Calling this function tells TSA that we know that the lock is effectively
|
|
|
|
* taken even though we cannot prove it (yet) with GRAPH_RDLOCK. This can be
|
|
|
|
* useful in intermediate stages of a conversion to using the GRAPH_RDLOCK
|
|
|
|
* macro.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
static inline void TSA_ASSERT_SHARED(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA
|
|
|
|
assume_graph_lock(void)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 14:18:23 +01:00
|
|
|
typedef struct GraphLockable { } GraphLockable;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* In C, compound literals have the lifetime of an automatic variable.
|
|
|
|
* In C++ it would be different, but then C++ wouldn't need QemuLockable
|
|
|
|
* either...
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
#define GML_OBJ_() (&(GraphLockable) { })
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* This is not marked as TSA_ACQUIRE() because TSA doesn't understand the
|
|
|
|
* cleanup attribute and would therefore complain that the graph is never
|
|
|
|
* unlocked. TSA_ASSERT() makes sure that the following calls know that we
|
|
|
|
* hold the lock while unlocking is left unchecked.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
static inline GraphLockable * TSA_ASSERT(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA
|
|
|
|
graph_lockable_auto_lock(GraphLockable *x)
|
2022-12-07 14:18:23 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
bdrv_graph_co_rdlock();
|
|
|
|
return x;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
static inline void TSA_NO_TSA
|
|
|
|
graph_lockable_auto_unlock(GraphLockable *x)
|
2022-12-07 14:18:23 +01:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
bdrv_graph_co_rdunlock();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G_DEFINE_AUTOPTR_CLEANUP_FUNC(GraphLockable, graph_lockable_auto_unlock)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#define WITH_GRAPH_RDLOCK_GUARD_(var) \
|
|
|
|
for (g_autoptr(GraphLockable) var = graph_lockable_auto_lock(GML_OBJ_()); \
|
|
|
|
var; \
|
|
|
|
graph_lockable_auto_unlock(var), var = NULL)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#define WITH_GRAPH_RDLOCK_GUARD() \
|
|
|
|
WITH_GRAPH_RDLOCK_GUARD_(glue(graph_lockable_auto, __COUNTER__))
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#define GRAPH_RDLOCK_GUARD(x) \
|
|
|
|
g_autoptr(GraphLockable) \
|
|
|
|
glue(graph_lockable_auto, __COUNTER__) G_GNUC_UNUSED = \
|
|
|
|
graph_lockable_auto_lock(GML_OBJ_())
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
typedef struct GraphLockableMainloop { } GraphLockableMainloop;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* In C, compound literals have the lifetime of an automatic variable.
|
|
|
|
* In C++ it would be different, but then C++ wouldn't need QemuLockable
|
|
|
|
* either...
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
#define GMLML_OBJ_() (&(GraphLockableMainloop) { })
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* This is not marked as TSA_ACQUIRE() because TSA doesn't understand the
|
|
|
|
* cleanup attribute and would therefore complain that the graph is never
|
|
|
|
* unlocked. TSA_ASSERT() makes sure that the following calls know that we
|
|
|
|
* hold the lock while unlocking is left unchecked.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
static inline GraphLockableMainloop * TSA_ASSERT(graph_lock) TSA_NO_TSA
|
2022-12-07 14:18:23 +01:00
|
|
|
graph_lockable_auto_lock_mainloop(GraphLockableMainloop *x)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
bdrv_graph_rdlock_main_loop();
|
|
|
|
return x;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2022-12-07 14:18:34 +01:00
|
|
|
static inline void TSA_NO_TSA
|
2022-12-07 14:18:23 +01:00
|
|
|
graph_lockable_auto_unlock_mainloop(GraphLockableMainloop *x)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
bdrv_graph_rdunlock_main_loop();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G_DEFINE_AUTOPTR_CLEANUP_FUNC(GraphLockableMainloop,
|
|
|
|
graph_lockable_auto_unlock_mainloop)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#define GRAPH_RDLOCK_GUARD_MAINLOOP(x) \
|
|
|
|
g_autoptr(GraphLockableMainloop) \
|
|
|
|
glue(graph_lockable_auto, __COUNTER__) G_GNUC_UNUSED = \
|
|
|
|
graph_lockable_auto_lock_mainloop(GMLML_OBJ_())
|
|
|
|
|
graph-lock: Introduce a lock to protect block graph operations
Block layer graph operations are always run under BQL in the main loop.
This is proved by the assertion qemu_in_main_thread() and its wrapper
macro GLOBAL_STATE_CODE.
However, there are also concurrent coroutines running in other iothreads
that always try to traverse the graph. Currently this is protected
(among various other things) by the AioContext lock, but once this is
removed, we need to make sure that reads do not happen while modifying
the graph.
We distinguish between writer (main loop, under BQL) that modifies the
graph, and readers (all other coroutines running in various AioContext),
that go through the graph edges, reading ->parents and->children.
The writer (main loop) has "exclusive" access, so it first waits for any
current read to finish, and then prevents incoming ones from entering
while it has the exclusive access.
The readers (coroutines in multiple AioContext) are free to access the
graph as long the writer is not modifying the graph. In case it is, they
go in a CoQueue and sleep until the writer is done.
If a coroutine changes AioContext, the counter in the original and new
AioContext are left intact, since the writer does not care where the
reader is, but only if there is one.
As a result, some AioContexts might have a negative reader count, to
balance the positive count of the AioContext that took the lock. This
also means that when an AioContext is deleted it may have a nonzero
reader count. In that case we transfer the count to a global shared
counter so that the writer is always aware of all readers.
Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20221207131838.239125-3-kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
2022-12-07 14:18:22 +01:00
|
|
|
#endif /* GRAPH_LOCK_H */
|
|
|
|
|