On 25/10/2016 16:38, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 25.10.2016 um 15:53 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben: >> >> >> On 25/10/2016 15:39, Alberto Garcia wrote: >>> On Mon 24 Oct 2016 12:53:41 PM CEST, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> >>>>> My first thoughts were about how to let an unpause succeed without a >>>>> previous pause for these objects, but actually I think this isn't >>>>> what we should do. We rather want to actually do the pause instead >>>>> because even new BDSes and block jobs should probably start in a >>>>> quiesced state when created inside a drain_all section. >>>> >>>> Yes, I agree with this. It shouldn't be too hard to implement it. It >>>> would require a BlockDriverState to look at the global "inside >>>> bdrv_drain_all_begin" state, and ask its BlockBackend to disable >>>> itself upon bdrv_replace_child. >>> >>> Why in bdrv_replace_child()? bdrv_drain_all_end() enables all BDSs, but >>> if you add one with "blockdev-add" it's not going to be disabled using >>> this method. >> >> You only need to disable it when blk_insert_bs is called. In fact... > > This assumes that the block driver doesn't issue internal background I/O > by itself. Probably true for everything that we have today, but it would > probably be cleaner to quiesce it directly in bdrv_open_common().
So bs->quiesce_counter = all_quiesce_counter; ? That would work. Should bdrv_close assert bs->quiesce_counter==0 (which implies all_quiesce_counter == 0), since it usually has to do I/O? >>> In addition to that block jobs need the same, don't they? Something like >>> "job->pause_count = all_quiesce_counter" in the initialization. >> >> ... we discussed a couple weeks ago that block jobs should register >> BlkDeviceOps that pause the job in the drained_begin callback. So when >> the block job calls blk_insert_bs, the drained_begin callback would >> start the job as paused. > > Yes, should, but doing this kind of infrastructure work isn't something > for this series. I agree. I was just explaining why it wouldn't be necessary to initialize job->pause_count. Paolo >>> I think we'd also need to add block_job_pause_point() at the beginning >>> of each one of their coroutines, in order to make sure that they really >>> start paused. >> >> It depends on the job, for example streaming starts with >> block_job_sleep_ns. Commit also does, except for some blk_getlength and >> blk_truncate calls that could be moved to the caller. > > Kevin >