On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:58:30AM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 17.12.2020 um 10:37 hat Sergio Lopez geschrieben:
> > Do you think it's safe to re-enter backup-top, or should we look for a
> > way to avoid this?
> 
> I think it should be avoided, but I don't understand why putting all
> children of backup-top into the ignore list doesn't already avoid it. If
> backup-top is in the parents list of qcow2, then qcow2 should be in the
> children list of backup-top and therefore the BdrvChild should already
> be in the ignore list.
> 
> The only way I can explain this is that backup-top and qcow2 have
> different ideas about which BdrvChild objects exist that connect them.
> Or that the graph changes between both places, but I don't see how that
> could happen in bdrv_set_aio_context_ignore().

I've been digging around with gdb, and found that, at that point, the
backup-top BDS is actually referenced by two different BdrvChild
objects:

(gdb) p *(BdrvChild *) 0x560c40f7e400
$84 = {bs = 0x560c40c4c030, name = 0x560c41ca4960 "root", klass = 0x560c3eae7c20 <child_root>, 
  role = 20, opaque = 0x560c41ca4610, perm = 3, shared_perm = 29, has_backup_perm = false, 
  backup_perm = 0, backup_shared_perm = 31, frozen = false, parent_quiesce_counter = 2, next = {
    le_next = 0x0, le_prev = 0x0}, next_parent = {le_next = 0x0, le_prev = 0x560c40c44338}}

(gdb) p sibling
$72 = (BdrvChild *) 0x560c40981840
(gdb) p *sibling
$73 = {bs = 0x560c40c4c030, name = 0x560c4161be20 "main node", klass = 0x560c3eae6a40 <child_job>, 
  role = 0, opaque = 0x560c4161bc00, perm = 0, shared_perm = 31, has_backup_perm = false, 
  backup_perm = 0, backup_shared_perm = 0, frozen = false, parent_quiesce_counter = 2, next = {
    le_next = 0x0, le_prev = 0x0}, next_parent = {le_next = 0x560c40c442d0, le_prev = 0x560c40c501c0}}

When the chain of calls to switch AIO contexts is started, backup-top
is the first one to be processed. blk_do_set_aio_context() instructs
bdrv_child_try_set_aio_context() to add blk->root (0x560c40f7e400) as
the first element in ignore list, but the referenced BDS is still
re-entered through the other BdrvChild (0x560c40981840) by one the
children of the latter.

I can't think of a way of preventing this other than keeping track of
BDS pointers in the ignore list too. Do you think there are any
alternatives?

Thanks,
Sergio.