[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 0/7] file descriptor passing using pass-fd





On 07/05/2012 01:00 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 07/05/2012 10:35 AM, Corey Bryant wrote:

1. client calls 'add-fd', qemu is now tracking fd=4 in fdset1 with
refcount of 0; fd=4's in-use flag is turned on
2. client calls 'device-add' with /dev/fdset/1 as the backing filename,
so qemu_open() increments the refcount of fdset1 to 1
3. client crashes, so all tracked fds are visited; fd=4 had not yet been
passed to 'remove-fd', so it's in-use flag is on;  in-use flag is turned
off and fd=4 is left open because it is still in use by the block device
(refcount is 1)
4. client re-establishes QMP connection, so all tracked fds are visited,
and in-use flags are turned back on; 'query-fds' lets client learn about
fd=4 still being open as part of fdset1

This says that an in-use fd comes back into use after a crash...


1. client calls 'add-fd', qemu is now tracking fd=4 in fdset1 with
refcount of 0; fd=4's in-use flag is turned on
2. client calls 'device-add' with /dev/fdset/1 as the backing filename,
so qemu_open() increments the refcount of fdset1 to 1
3. client calls 'remove-fd fdset=1 fd=4', so qemu marks fd=4 as no
longer in-use by the monitor, and is left open because it is in use by
the block device (refcount is 1)
4. client crashes, so all tracked fds are visited; fd=4 is not in-use
but refcount is 1 so it is not closed
5. client re-establishes QMP connection, so all tracked fds are visited.
  What happens to the fd=4 in-use flag?

...but what are the semantics here?

If we _always_ turn the in-use flag back on, then that says that even
though libvirt successfully asked to close the fd, the reconnection
means that libvirt once again has to ask to close things.


Ah, yeah I missed that.

If we _never_ turn the in-use flag back on, then we've broken the first
case above where we want an in-use fd to come back into use after a crash.

Maybe that argues for two flags per fd: an in-use flag (there is
currently a monitor connection that can manipulate the fd, either
because it passed in the fd or because it reconnected) and a removed
flag (a monitor called remove-fd, and no longer wants to know about the
fd, even if it crashes and reconnects).  An fd is then closed when
'refcount == 0 && (!inuse || removed)'.  On monitor disconnect, the
inuse flag is cleared, and on reconnect, it is set; but that does not
impact the removed flag.  And the 'query-fds' command would omit any fd
with the 'removed' flag, even when the fd is still kept open internally
thanks to the refcount being nonzero.


I agree. Having the 2 flags makes sense and solves the issues you mentioned above.


--
Regards,
Corey


But I'm definitely agreeing that tying the refcount to the set rather
than to individual fds within the set makes sense; you still avoid the
fd leak in that all fds in the set are closed when both the monitor has
disavowed the set and when qemu_close() has finished using any of the fds.



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]