[libvirt] [RFC] Add a new feild to qemud_save_header to tell if the saved image is corrupt

[Osier Yang]

于 2011年08月17日 23:50, Eric Blake 写道:
> On 08/17/2011 08:59 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 09:10:41PM +0800, Osier Yang wrote:
>>> If one tries to restore a domain from a corrupt save image, we blindly
>>> goes forward to restore from it, this can cause many different errors,
>>> depending on how much the image is saved. E.g.
>>>
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730750
>>>
>>> So I'm thinking if we can introduce a new feild to struct 
>>> qemud_save_header,
>>> such as "bool complete;", and set it true if succeeded to save the 
>>> image,
>>> false if not. So that could do some checking while trying to open 
>>> the image
>>> (qemuDomainSaveImageOpen), and quit early if "complete" is false, with
>>> a sensiable error message.
>>>
>>> Thought?
>>
>> I assume you mean that when saving the guest, we'd do the following 
>> sequence
>>
>> 1. Write out basic header with complete=false
>> 2. Write out XML doc
>> 3. Run 'migrate' in QEMU to write save state
>> 4. If success, update header with complete=true
>>
>> And then on restore we'd do
>>
>> 1. If complete == false, then quit with error
>> 2. Run QEMU with -incoming to restore
>
> Yes, I think we need that.
>
>>
>> At which point I wonder what's wrong with:
>>
>> 1. Write out basic header
>> 2. Write out XML doc
>> 3. Run 'migrate' in QEMU to write save state
>> 4. If not success, unlink save fail
>>
>> The only case where there's any difference, is if libvirtd itself 
>> crashes
>> between steps 1& 4.
>
> Remember, that 'migrate' is a long-running async job command, and can 
> be interrupted. That is, 'service libvirtd restart' is a legal action 
> to take during step 3, and it is not as severe as a libvirtd crash, 
> and we have already recently added patches to remember async job 
> status across libvirtd restarts with the intention of making it legal 
> to restart libvirtd in the middle of an async job (whether the async 
> job should still succeed, or should remove the save file, is a 
> slightly different question; but removing the save file would require 
> that we save in the XML the name of the file to remove if libvirtd is 
> restarted).

Hmm, how about restart libvirtd during the process of managed saving?

Domain will be restored from the corrupt save image automatically. We
report an error like "image is corrupt" and quite the domain starting 
simply?
This might be not good, as one will see a running domain fails to start
after libvirtd restarting.

Or we want to the managed saving still succeed? If so, we might need:

1) continue the managed saving job, (Per we are already support remeber
the async job status across libvirtd restarting)
2) restore from the saved image finished in 1).


> Also, in the case of 'virsh save', the file is user-visible, and 
> there's no telling if a user does 'virsh save' in one window, then 
> asynchronously types 'cp file elsewhere; virsh restore elsewhere' in 
> another window before the first one has finished. Using the longer 
> algorithm of marking 'complete=false' then revisiting it to write 
> 'complete=true' provides more protection against users accessing their 
> file system asynchronously, where they can otherwise get a corrupt 
> image even without a libvirtd crash or restart.
>