> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 3:08 AM
> To: Guzovsky, Eduard; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Murray, Kimball
> Subject: Re: backend block driver and domain migration blackout time
>
> On 26/8/08 00:25, "Guzovsky, Eduard" <Eduard.Guzovsky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> >
> > We are working on reducing blackout time during domain migrations in
xen
> > 3.1.0. We ran into a problem when backend block driver removes the
> > backend device without waiting for the main kernel thread created by
the
> > driver to actually complete all outstanding io. This happens in the
> > final stages of the migration process when guest domain is being
> > destroyed.
> >
> > static int blkback_remove(struct xenbus_device *dev) {
> > struct backend_info *be = dev->dev.driver_data;
> >
> > ...
> > if (kthread_remove(be))
> > WPRINTK("BAD REMOVE REQUEST for %s\n", be->nodename);
> >
> > ...
> >
> > backend_release(be);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
>
> I don't recognise the code above from any version of our Linux
patchset.
> I'm
> pretty sure that the races you mention, which might be present in the
3.1
> Linux sparse tree, are fixed in our linux-2.6.18-xen.hg repository.
>
> -- Keir
Hi Keir,
Thank you for the quick response. You are correct linux-2.6.18-xen.hg
does not have this race condition. It is a problem in CentOS
distribution that we use.
What about the second part of the question - modifying xend to reduce
blackout time during domain migration? In xen 3.1.0 "unleashing" domain
on the target is gated by the destruction of the domain on the source.
Destruction of domains with lots of memory is a very time consuming
process. To speed things up we added a separate "migration" case in
XendCheckpoint.py "save" function that does
dominfo._releaseDevices(force = True)
wait_for_outstanding_vbd_io_complete() # "shutdown-done" in xenstore
unleash_the_target()
just before the current
dominfo.destroyDomain()
dominfo.testDeviceComplete()
The complete xend patch is below. Works fine in our testing but is this
a safe thing to do?
Thanks,
-Ed
diff -ur ax/tools/python/xen/xend/XendCheckpoint.py
bx/tools/python/xen/xend/XendCheckpoint.py
--- ax/tools/python/xen/xend/XendCheckpoint.py 2008-08-25
17:18:14.000000000 -0400
+++ bx/tools/python/xen/xend/XendCheckpoint.py 2008-08-25
17:18:40.000000000 -0400
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@
return buf
-def save(fd, dominfo, network, live, dst, checkpoint=False):
+def save(fd, dominfo, network, live, dst, checkpoint=False, sock=None):
write_exact(fd, SIGNATURE, "could not write guest state file:
signature")
config = sxp.to_string(dominfo.sxpr()) @@ -124,8 +124,17 @@
if checkpoint:
dominfo.resumeDomain()
else:
- dominfo.destroyDomain()
- dominfo.testDeviceComplete()
+ if sock is None:
+ dominfo.destroyDomain()
+ dominfo.testDeviceComplete()
+ else:
+ # handle migration - "Use the Force, Luke"
+ dominfo._releaseDevices(force = True)
+ dominfo.testDeviceComplete(io_done = True)
+ sock.shutdown(2)
+ dominfo.destroyDomain()
+ dominfo.testDeviceComplete()
+
try:
dominfo.setName(domain_name)
except VmError:
diff -ur ax/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomain.py
bx/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomain.py
--- ax/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomain.py 2008-08-25
17:18:14.000000000 -0400
+++ bx/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomain.py 2008-08-25
17:18:40.000000000 -0400
@@ -1242,7 +1242,8 @@
try:
sock.send("receive\n")
sock.recv(80)
- XendCheckpoint.save(sock.fileno(), dominfo, True, live,
dst)
+ XendCheckpoint.save(sock.fileno(), dominfo, True, live,
dst,
+ sock=sock)
finally:
sock.close()
diff -ur ax/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py
bx/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py
--- ax/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py 2008-08-25
17:18:14.000000000 -0400
+++ bx/tools/python/xen/xend/XendDomainInfo.py 2008-08-25
17:18:40.000000000 -0400
@@ -1336,7 +1336,7 @@
if self.image:
self.image.createDeviceModel()
- def _releaseDevices(self, suspend = False):
+ def _releaseDevices(self, suspend = False, force = False):
"""Release all domain's devices. Nothrow guarantee."""
if suspend and self.image:
self.image.destroy(suspend) @@ -1347,7 +1347,7 @@
for dev in t.list(devclass):
try:
log.debug("Removing %s", dev);
- self.destroyDevice(devclass, dev, False);
+ self.destroyDevice(devclass, dev, force)
except:
# Log and swallow any exceptions in removal --
# there's nothing more we can do.
@@ -1907,7 +1907,7 @@
except:
log.exception("Unwatching VM path failed.")
- def testDeviceComplete(self):
+ def testDeviceComplete(self, io_done = False):
""" For Block IO migration safety we must ensure that
the device has shutdown correctly, i.e. all blocks are
flushed to disk
@@ -1920,19 +1920,34 @@
test = 0
for i in ctrlr.deviceIDs():
be = "%s/%s" % (bep, i)
- try:
- hs = xstransact.Read(be,"hotplug-status")
- if hs is None:
- # dir must have been deleted and recreated
- log.info("Dev %s deleted (dir exists)", i)
- else:
- # Hmm.. device really is still there
- log.info("Dev %s still exists, looping", i)
- test = 1
- except:
- # exception reading directory - must be
- # gone now...
- log.info("Dev %s deleted", i)
+ if io_done:
+ try:
+ hs = xstransact.Read(be,"shutdown-done")
+ if hs is None:
+ # io is not completed yet
+ log.info("Dev %s io not done, looping", i)
+ test = 1
+ else:
+ #
+ log.info("Dev %s io is done", i)
+ except:
+ # exception reading directory - must be
+ # gone now...
+ log.info("Dev %s deleted", i)
+ else:
+ try:
+ hs = xstransact.Read(be,"hotplug-status")
+ if hs is None:
+ # dir must have been deleted and recreated
+ log.info("Dev %s deleted (dir exists)", i)
+ else:
+ # Hmm.. device really is still there
+ log.info("Dev %s still exists, looping", i)
+ test = 1
+ except:
+ # exception reading directory - must be
+ # gone now...
+ log.info("Dev %s deleted", i)
if test == 0:
break
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home