Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] block-copy: streamline choice of copy_range vs. read/write

[Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com>]

18.05.2021 13:07, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
> From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> 
> Put the logic to determine the copy size in a separate function, so
> that there is a simple state machine for the possible methods of
> copying data from one BlockDriverState to the other.

Honestly, for me 4-state state-maching + function to determine copy-size doesn't seem better than two simple variables copy_size and use_copy_range.

What's the benefit of it?

> 
> While at it, store the common computation of block_copy_max_transfer
> into a new field of BlockCopyState, and make sure that we always
> obey max_transfer; that's more efficient even for the
> COPY_RANGE_READ_WRITE case.

hmm, maybe. It could be a separate patch.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> ---
>   block/block-copy.c | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------

stats agree with me, that its' not a simplification.

>   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/block-copy.c b/block/block-copy.c
> index 37c8e8504b..10ce51a244 100644
> --- a/block/block-copy.c
> +++ b/block/block-copy.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,13 @@
>   #define BLOCK_COPY_MAX_WORKERS 64
>   #define BLOCK_COPY_SLICE_TIME 100000000ULL /* ns */
>   
> +typedef enum {
> +    COPY_READ_WRITE_CLUSTER,
> +    COPY_READ_WRITE,
> +    COPY_RANGE_SMALL,
> +    COPY_RANGE_FULL
> +} BlockCopyMethod;
> +
>   static coroutine_fn int block_copy_task_entry(AioTask *task);
>   
>   typedef struct BlockCopyCallState {
> @@ -85,8 +92,8 @@ typedef struct BlockCopyState {
>       BdrvDirtyBitmap *copy_bitmap;
>       int64_t in_flight_bytes;
>       int64_t cluster_size;
> -    bool use_copy_range;
> -    int64_t copy_size;
> +    BlockCopyMethod method;
> +    int64_t max_transfer;
>       uint64_t len;
>       QLIST_HEAD(, BlockCopyTask) tasks; /* All tasks from all block-copy calls */
>       QLIST_HEAD(, BlockCopyCallState) calls;
> @@ -148,6 +155,23 @@ static bool coroutine_fn block_copy_wait_one(BlockCopyState *s, int64_t offset,
>       return true;
>   }
>   
> +static inline int64_t block_copy_chunk_size(BlockCopyState *s)

"inline" word does nothing in static definitions in c files. Compiler make a decision independently of it.

> +{
> +    switch (s->method) {
> +    case COPY_READ_WRITE_CLUSTER:
> +        return s->cluster_size;
> +    case COPY_READ_WRITE:
> +    case COPY_RANGE_SMALL:
> +        return MIN(MAX(s->cluster_size, BLOCK_COPY_MAX_BUFFER),
> +                   s->max_transfer);
> +    case COPY_RANGE_FULL:
> +        return MIN(MAX(s->cluster_size, BLOCK_COPY_MAX_COPY_RANGE),
> +                   s->max_transfer);
> +    default:
> +        abort();
> +    }
> +}
> +
>   /*
>    * Search for the first dirty area in offset/bytes range and create task at
>    * the beginning of it.
> @@ -157,8 +181,9 @@ static BlockCopyTask *block_copy_task_create(BlockCopyState *s,
>                                                int64_t offset, int64_t bytes)
>   {
>       BlockCopyTask *task;
> -    int64_t max_chunk = MIN_NON_ZERO(s->copy_size, call_state->max_chunk);
> +    int64_t max_chunk = block_copy_chunk_size(s);
>   
> +    max_chunk = MIN_NON_ZERO(max_chunk, call_state->max_chunk);
>       if (!bdrv_dirty_bitmap_next_dirty_area(s->copy_bitmap,
>                                              offset, offset + bytes,
>                                              max_chunk, &offset, &bytes))
> @@ -265,28 +290,27 @@ BlockCopyState *block_copy_state_new(BdrvChild *source, BdrvChild *target,
>           .len = bdrv_dirty_bitmap_size(copy_bitmap),
>           .write_flags = write_flags,
>           .mem = shres_create(BLOCK_COPY_MAX_MEM),
> +        .max_transfer = QEMU_ALIGN_DOWN(block_copy_max_transfer(source, target)
> +                                        , cluster_size),
>       };
>   
> -    if (block_copy_max_transfer(source, target) < cluster_size) {
> +    if (s->max_transfer < cluster_size) {
>           /*
>            * copy_range does not respect max_transfer. We don't want to bother
>            * with requests smaller than block-copy cluster size, so fallback to
>            * buffered copying (read and write respect max_transfer on their
>            * behalf).
>            */
> -        s->use_copy_range = false;
> -        s->copy_size = cluster_size;
> +        s->method = COPY_READ_WRITE_CLUSTER;
>       } else if (write_flags & BDRV_REQ_WRITE_COMPRESSED) {
>           /* Compression supports only cluster-size writes and no copy-range. */
> -        s->use_copy_range = false;
> -        s->copy_size = cluster_size;
> +        s->method = COPY_READ_WRITE_CLUSTER;
>       } else {
>           /*
>            * We enable copy-range, but keep small copy_size, until first
>            * successful copy_range (look at block_copy_do_copy).
>            */
> -        s->use_copy_range = use_copy_range;
> -        s->copy_size = MAX(s->cluster_size, BLOCK_COPY_MAX_BUFFER);
> +        s->method = use_copy_range ? COPY_RANGE_SMALL : COPY_READ_WRITE;
>       }
>   
>       ratelimit_init(&s->rate_limit);
> @@ -369,30 +393,25 @@ static int coroutine_fn block_copy_do_copy(BlockCopyState *s,
>           return ret;
>       }
>   
> -    if (s->use_copy_range) {
> +    if (s->method >= COPY_RANGE_SMALL) {

I don't like such condition:
1. it forces me to go to enum definition to understand the logic
2. it's error prone: it's very possibly to forget to update it, when updating the enum, and logic will be broken.

No, I don't like moving to state machine for this simple thing.

>           ret = bdrv_co_copy_range(s->source, offset, s->target, offset, nbytes,
>                                    0, s->write_flags);
>           if (ret < 0) {
>               trace_block_copy_copy_range_fail(s, offset, ret);
> -            s->use_copy_range = false;
> -            s->copy_size = MAX(s->cluster_size, BLOCK_COPY_MAX_BUFFER);
> +            s->method = COPY_READ_WRITE;
>               /* Fallback to read+write with allocated buffer */
>           } else {
> -            if (s->use_copy_range) {
> +            if (s->method == COPY_RANGE_SMALL) {
>                   /*
>                    * Successful copy-range. Now increase copy_size.  copy_range
>                    * does not respect max_transfer (it's a TODO), so we factor
>                    * that in here.
>                    *
> -                 * Note: we double-check s->use_copy_range for the case when
> +                 * Note: we double-check s->method for the case when
>                    * parallel block-copy request unsets it during previous
>                    * bdrv_co_copy_range call.
>                    */
> -                s->copy_size =
> -                        MIN(MAX(s->cluster_size, BLOCK_COPY_MAX_COPY_RANGE),
> -                            QEMU_ALIGN_DOWN(block_copy_max_transfer(s->source,
> -                                                                    s->target),
> -                                            s->cluster_size));
> +                s->method = COPY_RANGE_FULL;
>               }
>               goto out;
>           }
> 


-- 
Best regards,
Vladimir