qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] util/hbitmap: fix unaligned reset


From: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] util/hbitmap: fix unaligned reset
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 11:37:18 +0000

05.08.2019 14:32, Max Reitz wrote:
> On 02.08.19 20:58, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>> hbitmap_reset is broken: it rounds up the requested region. It leads to
>> the following bug, which is shown by fixed test:
>>
>> assume granularity = 2
>> set(0, 3) # count becomes 4
>> reset(0, 1) # count becomes 2
>>
>> But user of the interface assume that virtual bit 1 should be still
>> dirty, so hbitmap should report count to be 4!
>>
>> In other words, because of granularity, when we set one "virtual" bit,
>> yes, we make all "virtual" bits in same chunk to be dirty. But this
>> should not be so for reset.
>>
>> Fix this, aligning bound correctly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <address@hidden>
>> ---
>>
>> Hi all!
>>
>> Hmm, is it a bug or feature? :)
>> I don't have a test for mirror yet, but I think that sync mirror may be 
>> broken
>> because of this, as do_sync_target_write() seems to be using unaligned reset.
>>
>>   tests/test-hbitmap.c |  2 +-
>>   util/hbitmap.c       | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
>>   2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/test-hbitmap.c b/tests/test-hbitmap.c
>> index 592d8219db..0008025a9f 100644
>> --- a/tests/test-hbitmap.c
>> +++ b/tests/test-hbitmap.c
>> @@ -424,7 +424,7 @@ static void test_hbitmap_granularity(TestHBitmapData 
>> *data,
>>       hbitmap_test_set(data, 0, 3);
>>       g_assert_cmpint(hbitmap_count(data->hb), ==, 4);
>>       hbitmap_test_reset(data, 0, 1);
>> -    g_assert_cmpint(hbitmap_count(data->hb), ==, 2);
>> +    g_assert_cmpint(hbitmap_count(data->hb), ==, 4);
>>   }
>>   
>>   static void test_hbitmap_iter_granularity(TestHBitmapData *data,
>> diff --git a/util/hbitmap.c b/util/hbitmap.c
>> index 7905212a8b..61a813994a 100644
>> --- a/util/hbitmap.c
>> +++ b/util/hbitmap.c
>> @@ -473,15 +473,29 @@ void hbitmap_reset(HBitmap *hb, uint64_t start, 
>> uint64_t count)
>>   {
>>       /* Compute range in the last layer.  */
>>       uint64_t first;
>> -    uint64_t last = start + count - 1;
>> +    uint64_t last;
>> +    uint64_t end = start + count;
>> +    uint64_t gran = UINT64_C(1) << hb->granularity;
>>   
>> -    trace_hbitmap_reset(hb, start, count,
>> -                        start >> hb->granularity, last >> hb->granularity);
>> +    /*
>> +     * We should clear only bits, fully covered by requested region. 
>> Otherwise
>> +     * we may clear something that is actually still dirty.
>> +     */
>> +    first = DIV_ROUND_UP(start, gran);
>>   
>> -    first = start >> hb->granularity;
>> -    last >>= hb->granularity;
>> +    if (end == hb->orig_size) {
> 
> This should be “>=”.
> 
> There are callers that don’t make sure that start + count <=
> hb->orig_size (e.g. the backup job just calls it with multiples of
> cluster_size, which may or may not end up at the image end; and
> hbitmap_truncate() just uses “hb->size << hb->granularity” as the end,
> which is arguably not ideal, but that’s how it is).
> 

Ah, yes, you are right. Originally, I had and assertion that end <= 
hb->orig_size,
but it failed with test because of these cases. I dropped it and forgot to 
update
the condition. Ogh, this is how such small huge bugs are appearing..


-- 
Best regards,
Vladimir

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]