Re: [PATCH 02/13] test-bdrv-drain: Don't yield in .bdrv_co_drained_begin/end()

[Kevin Wolf]

Am 09.11.2022 um 11:50 hat Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy geschrieben:
> On 11/8/22 15:37, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> > We want to change .bdrv_co_drained_begin/end() back to be non-coroutine
> > callbacks, so in preparation, avoid yielding in their implementation.
> > 
> > This does almost the same as the existing logic in bdrv_drain_invoke(),
> > by creating and entering coroutines internally. However, since the test
> > case is by far the heaviest user of coroutine code in drain callbacks,
> > it is preferable to have the complexity in the test case rather than the
> > drain core, which is already complicated enough without this.
> > 
> > The behaviour for bdrv_drain_begin() is unchanged because we increase
> > bs->in_flight and this is still polled. However, bdrv_drain_end()
> > doesn't wait for the spawned coroutine to complete any more. This is
> > fine, we don't rely on bdrv_drain_end() restarting all operations
> > immediately before the next aio_poll().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >   tests/unit/test-bdrv-drain.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> >   1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tests/unit/test-bdrv-drain.c b/tests/unit/test-bdrv-drain.c
> > index 09dc4a4891..24f34e24ad 100644
> > --- a/tests/unit/test-bdrv-drain.c
> > +++ b/tests/unit/test-bdrv-drain.c
> > @@ -38,12 +38,22 @@ typedef struct BDRVTestState {
> >       bool sleep_in_drain_begin;
> >   } BDRVTestState;
> > +static void coroutine_fn sleep_in_drain_begin(void *opaque)
> > +{
> > +    BlockDriverState *bs = opaque;
> > +
> > +    qemu_co_sleep_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_REALTIME, 100000);
> > +    bdrv_dec_in_flight(bs);
> > +}
> > +
> >   static void coroutine_fn bdrv_test_co_drain_begin(BlockDriverState *bs)
> >   {
> >       BDRVTestState *s = bs->opaque;
> >       s->drain_count++;
> >       if (s->sleep_in_drain_begin) {
> > -        qemu_co_sleep_ns(QEMU_CLOCK_REALTIME, 100000);
> > +        Coroutine *co = qemu_coroutine_create(sleep_in_drain_begin, bs);
> > +        bdrv_inc_in_flight(bs);
> > +        aio_co_enter(bdrv_get_aio_context(bs), co);
> >       }
> >   }
> > @@ -1916,6 +1926,21 @@ static int coroutine_fn 
> > bdrv_replace_test_co_preadv(BlockDriverState *bs,
> >       return 0;
> >   }
> > +static void coroutine_fn bdrv_replace_test_drain_co(void *opaque)
> > +{
> > +    BlockDriverState *bs = opaque;
> > +    BDRVReplaceTestState *s = bs->opaque;
> > +
> > +    /* Keep waking io_co up until it is done */
> > +    while (s->io_co) {
> > +        aio_co_wake(s->io_co);
> > +        s->io_co = NULL;
> > +        qemu_coroutine_yield();
> > +    }
> > +    s->drain_co = NULL;
> > +    bdrv_dec_in_flight(bs);
> > +}
> 
> Same question, don't we need aio_wait_kick() after decrement in_flight.
> 
> Also, seems we have here extra waiting level: a special coroutine that waits 
> in a loop.
> 
> Could we just do in .drain_begin:
> 
> if (s->io_co) {
>    bdrv_inc_in_flight(bs);
> }
> 
> and in .co_preadv instead of waking s->drain_co simply
> 
> if (s->drain_count == 1) {
>   bdrv_dec_in_flight(bs);
>   aio_wait_kick();
> }
> 
> or even better, do inc in_flight when io_co becomes not NULL.

I just did the minimal transformation of the existing code in the test
case.

These test cases often test specific interactions between coroutines, so
I could imagine that the additional yield is not just some inefficient
code, but coroutines that yield multiple times could actually be the
scenario that is supposed to be tested.

I didn't check it for this one, but making test cases more efficient
isn't automatically a good thing if they then end up not testing certain
code paths any more. So if you intend to make a change here, it would
need a careful analysis of all test cases that use the driver.

Kevin