QEMU-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Coiby Xu <coiby.xu@gmail.com>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: bharatlkmlkvm@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] a standone-alone tool to directly share disk image file via vhost-user protocol
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 09:00:45 +0800
Message-ID: <CAJAkqrUpn0aaJsew91h-Lqfkasxr67ygVWYTWWu=P7t1=5zxTA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200202093336.GB3456@localhost.localdomain>

> > > Yes, I think at least for the moment it should work fine this way.
> > > Eventually, I'd like to integrate it with --export (and associated QMP
> > > commands, which are still to be created), too. Maybe at that point we
> > > want to make the QOM object not user creatable any more.
> >
> > Does it mean TYPE_USER_CREATABLE interface in QOM will become
> > deprecated in the future? I'm curious what are the reasons for making
> > QOM object no user creatable? Because we may still need to start
> > vhost-user block device backend through HMP or QMP instead of stating
> > it as a standalone-alone daemon.

> Not in general, but if we have something like a block-export-add QMP
> command, the QOM interface would be redundant. We could still leave it
> there and have both a low-level and a high-level interface, but whether
> we would want to is something we still have to decide.

I see. So QOM interface will still be used as a low-level interface.
In the draft version, vhost-user-blk-server is started using specific
command vhost_user_server_start/vhost_user_server_stop which proivide
interfaces easier for implementing block-export-add QMP command. But
in later versions, only object_add/object_del syntax is supported to
start/stop vhost-user-blk-server. I'll keep an eye on how the storage
daemon develops and adapt my code accordingly.


On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 5:33 PM Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Am 31.01.2020 um 17:42 hat Coiby Xu geschrieben:
> > > Yes, I think at least for the moment it should work fine this way.
> > > Eventually, I'd like to integrate it with --export (and associated QMP
> > > commands, which are still to be created), too. Maybe at that point we
> > > want to make the QOM object not user creatable any more.
> >
> > Does it mean TYPE_USER_CREATABLE interface in QOM will become
> > deprecated in the future? I'm curious what are the reasons for making
> > QOM object no user creatable? Because we may still need to start
> > vhost-user block device backend through HMP or QMP instead of stating
> > it as a standalone-alone daemon.
>
> Not in general, but if we have something like a block-export-add QMP
> command, the QOM interface would be redundant. We could still leave it
> there and have both a low-level and a high-level interface, but whether
> we would want to is something we still have to decide.
>
> > > As for test cases, do you think it would be hard to just modify the
> > > tests to send an explicit 'quit' command to the daemon?
> >
> > Accroding to https://patchew.org/QEMU/20191017130204.16131-1-kwolf@redhat.com/20191017130204.16131-10-kwolf@redhat.com/,
> >
> > > +static bool exit_requested = false;
> > > +
> > > +void qemu_system_killed(int signal, pid_t pid)
> > > +{
> > > +    exit_requested = true;
> > > +}
> >
> > if exit_requested = true, qemu-storage-daemon will exit the main loop
> > and then quit. So is calling qemu_system_killed by what you means "to
> > send an explicit 'quit' command to the daemon"?
>
> qemu_system_killed() is call in the signal handlers for, amongst others,
> SIGTERM and SIGINT. This is one way to stop the storage daemon (for
> manual use, sending SIGINT with Ctrl-C is probably the easiest way).
>
> What I actually meant is the 'quit' QMP command which will cause
> qmp_quit() to be run, which contains the same code. But if sending a
> signal is more convenient, that's just as good.
>
> Kevin
>
> > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:12 PM Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Am 17.01.2020 um 09:12 hat Coiby Xu geschrieben:
> > > > Excellent! I will add an option (or object property) for
> > > > vhost-user-blk server oject which will tell the daemon process to exit
> > > > when the client disconnects, thus "make check-qtest" will not get held
> > > > by this daemon process. After that since Kevin's qemu-storage-daemon
> > > > support "-object" option
> > > > (https://patchew.org/QEMU/20191017130204.16131-1-kwolf@redhat.com/20191017130204.16131-3-kwolf@redhat.com/)
> > > > and vhost-user-server is a user-creatable QOM object, it will work out
> > > > of the box.
> > >
> > > Yes, I think at least for the moment it should work fine this way.
> > > Eventually, I'd like to integrate it with --export (and associated QMP
> > > commands, which are still to be created), too. Maybe at that point we
> > > want to make the QOM object not user creatable any more.
> > >
> > > Would it make sense to prefix the object type name with "x-" so we can
> > > later retire it from the external user interface without a deprecation
> > > period?
> > >
> > > As for test cases, do you think it would be hard to just modify the
> > > tests to send an explicit 'quit' command to the daemon?
> > >
> > > > I'm curious when will be formal version of qemu-storage-daemon
> > > > finished so I can take advantage of it? Or should I apply the RFC
> > > > PATCHes to my working branch directly and submit them together with
> > > > the patches on vhost-user-blk server feature when posting v3?
> > >
> > > It's the next thing I'm planning to work on after completing the
> > > coroutine-base QMP handlers (which I hope to get finished very soon).
> > >
> > > For the time being I would suggest that you put any patches that depend
> > > on qemu-storage-daemon (if you do need it) at the end of your series so
> > > that we could apply the first part even if the storage daemon isn't in
> > > yet.
> > >
> > > The latest version of my patches is at:
> > >
> > >     git://repo.or.cz/qemu/kevin.git storage-daemon
> > >
> > > But if you just need something for testing your code, I think it would
> > > even make sense if you kept your standalone tool around (even though
> > > we'll never merge it) and we'll deal with integration in the storage
> > > daemon once both parts are ready.
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Coiby
> >
>


--
Best regards,
Coiby


  reply index

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-14 14:06 [PATCH v2 0/5] vhost-user block device backend implementation Coiby Xu
2020-01-14 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] vhost-user block device backend Coiby Xu
2020-01-16 13:51   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2020-01-16 14:20     ` Kevin Wolf
2020-02-14  3:07     ` Coiby Xu
2020-01-16 13:56   ` Kevin Wolf
2020-02-20  7:04     ` Coiby Xu
2020-02-20  9:30     ` Coiby Xu
2020-01-14 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] extend libvhost to support IOThread Coiby Xu
2020-01-14 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] a standone-alone tool to directly share disk image file via vhost-user protocol Coiby Xu
2020-01-16 14:04   ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2020-01-17  8:12     ` Coiby Xu
2020-01-17 10:11       ` Kevin Wolf
2020-01-31 16:42         ` Coiby Xu
2020-02-02  9:33           ` Kevin Wolf
2020-02-13  1:00             ` Coiby Xu [this message]
2020-01-14 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] new qTest case for the vhost-user-blk device backend Coiby Xu
2020-01-14 14:06 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] building configuration files changes Coiby Xu
2020-01-16 11:07   ` Kevin Wolf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAJAkqrUpn0aaJsew91h-Lqfkasxr67ygVWYTWWu=P7t1=5zxTA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=coiby.xu@gmail.com \
    --cc=bharatlkmlkvm@gmail.com \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

QEMU-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/0 qemu-devel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/1 qemu-devel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 qemu-devel qemu-devel/ https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel \
		qemu-devel@nongnu.org
	public-inbox-index qemu-devel

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.nongnu.qemu-devel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git