Re: [PATCH] spapr: Migrate CAS reboot flag

[Greg Kurz]

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:14:35 +0100
Greg Kurz <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 11:37:24 +0100
> Laurent Vivier <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> > On 16/01/2020 09:48, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 19:10:37 +0100
> > > Laurent Vivier <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > 
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> On 15/01/2020 18:48, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > >>> Migration can potentially race with CAS reboot. If the migration thread
> > >>> completes migration after CAS has set spapr->cas_reboot but before the
> > >>> mainloop could pick up the reset request and reset the machine, the
> > >>> guest is migrated unrebooted and the destination doesn't reboot it
> > >>> either because it isn't aware a CAS reboot was needed (eg, because a
> > >>> device was added before CAS). This likely result in a broken or hung
> > >>> guest.
> > >>>
> > >>> Even if it is small, the window between CAS and CAS reboot is enough to
> > >>> re-qualify spapr->cas_reboot as state that we should migrate. Add a new
> > >>> subsection for that and always send it when a CAS reboot is pending.
> > >>> This may cause migration to older QEMUs to fail but it is still better
> > >>> than end up with a broken guest.
> > >>>
> > >>> The destination cannot honour the CAS reboot request from a post load
> > >>> handler because this must be done after the guest is fully restored.
> > >>> It is thus done from a VM change state handler.
> > >>>
> > >>> Reported-by: Lukáš Doktor <address@hidden>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <address@hidden>
> > >>> ---
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> I'm wondering if the problem can be related with the fact that
> > >> main_loop_should_exit() could release qemu_global_mutex in
> > >> pause_all_vcpus() in the reset case?
> > >>
> > >> 1602 static bool main_loop_should_exit(void)
> > >> 1603 {
> > >> ...
> > >> 1633     request = qemu_reset_requested();
> > >> 1634     if (request) {
> > >> 1635         pause_all_vcpus();
> > >> 1636         qemu_system_reset(request);
> > >> 1637         resume_all_vcpus();
> > >> 1638         if (!runstate_check(RUN_STATE_RUNNING) &&
> > >> 1639                 !runstate_check(RUN_STATE_INMIGRATE)) {
> > >> 1640             runstate_set(RUN_STATE_PRELAUNCH);
> > >> 1641         }
> > >> 1642     }
> > >> ...
> > >>
> > >> I already sent a patch for this kind of problem (in current Juan pull
> > >> request):
> > >>
> > >> "runstate: ignore finishmigrate -> prelaunch transition"
> > >>
> > > 
> > > IIUC your patch avoids an invalid 'prelaunch' -> 'postmigrate' runstate
> > > transition that can happen if the migration thread sets the runstate to
> > > 'finishmigrate' when pause_all_vcpus() releases the main loop mutex.
> > > 
> > > ie. symptom of the problem is QEMU aborting, correct ? The issue I'm
> > > trying to fix is a guest breakage caused by a discrepancy between
> > > QEMU and the guest after migration has succeeded.
> > > 
> > >> but I don't know if it could fix this one.
> > >>
> > > 
> > > I don't think so and your patch kinda illustrates it. If the runstate
> > > is 'finishmigrate' when returning from pause_all_vcpus(), this means
> > > that state was sent to the destination before we could actually reset
> > > the machine.
> > 
> > Yes, you're right.
> > 
> > But the question behind my comment was: is it expected to have a pending
> > reset while we are migrating?
> > 
> 
> Nothing prevents qemu_system_reset_request() to be called when migration
> is active. 
> 
> > Perhaps H_CAS can return H_BUSY and wait the end of the migration and
> > then be fully executed on destination?
> > 
> 
> And so we would need to teach SLOF to try H_CAS again until it stops
> returning H_BUSY ? It seems safer to migrate the CAS reboot flag IMHO.
> 

Ok I've tried that with a patched SLOF that sleeps 500ms and tries CAS
again if H_BUSY was returned. It fixes the issue but it looks a bit
ugly because of the polling with an arbitrary timeout in SLOF... I'm
not very comfortable either with calling migration_is_active() from
the CAS code in QEMU.

David,

Any suggestion ?

> > Thanks,
> > Laurent
> > 
>