multifd_send_sync_main() posts request on the multifd channel
but does not call sem_wait() on channels_ready semaphore, making
the channels_ready semaphore count keep increasing.
As a result, sem_wait() on channels_ready in multifd_send_pages()
is always non-blocking hence multifd_send_pages() keeps searching
for a free channel in a busy loop until a channel is freed.
Signed-off-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
---
migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
index cce3ad6988..43d26e7012 100644
--- a/migration/multifd.c
+++ b/migration/multifd.c
@@ -615,6 +615,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
trace_multifd_send_sync_main_signal(p->id);
+ qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
qemu_mutex_lock(&p->mutex);
if (p->quit) {
@@ -919,7 +920,7 @@ int multifd_save_setup(Error **errp)
multifd_send_state = g_malloc0(sizeof(*multifd_send_state));
multifd_send_state->params = g_new0(MultiFDSendParams, thread_count);
multifd_send_state->pages = multifd_pages_init(page_count);
- qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, 0);
+ qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, thread_count);
qatomic_set(&multifd_send_state->exiting, 0);
multifd_send_state->ops = multifd_ops[migrate_multifd_compression()];
--
2.22.3"manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
> multifd_send_sync_main() posts request on the multifd channel
> but does not call sem_wait() on channels_ready semaphore, making
> the channels_ready semaphore count keep increasing.
> As a result, sem_wait() on channels_ready in multifd_send_pages()
> is always non-blocking hence multifd_send_pages() keeps searching
> for a free channel in a busy loop until a channel is freed.
>
> Signed-off-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
> ---
> migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
> index cce3ad6988..43d26e7012 100644
> --- a/migration/multifd.c
> +++ b/migration/multifd.c
> @@ -615,6 +615,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
>
> trace_multifd_send_sync_main_signal(p->id);
>
> + qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
> qemu_mutex_lock(&p->mutex);
>
> if (p->quit) {
We need this, but I think it is better to put it on the second loop.
> @@ -919,7 +920,7 @@ int multifd_save_setup(Error **errp)
> multifd_send_state = g_malloc0(sizeof(*multifd_send_state));
> multifd_send_state->params = g_new0(MultiFDSendParams, thread_count);
> multifd_send_state->pages = multifd_pages_init(page_count);
> - qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, 0);
> + qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, thread_count);
> qatomic_set(&multifd_send_state->exiting, 0);
> multifd_send_state->ops = multifd_ops[migrate_multifd_compression()];
I think this bit is wrong.
We should not set the channels ready until the thread is ready and
channel is created.
What do you think about this patch:
From bcb0ef9b97b858458c403d2e4dc9e0dbd96721b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 12:20:36 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] multifd: Fix the number of channels ready
We don't wait in the sem when we are doing a sync_main. Make it wait
there. To make things clearer, we mark the channel ready at the
begining of the thread loop.
This causes a busy loop in multifd_send_page().
Found-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
---
migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
index 903df2117b..e625e8725e 100644
--- a/migration/multifd.c
+++ b/migration/multifd.c
@@ -635,6 +635,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
for (i = 0; i < migrate_multifd_channels(); i++) {
MultiFDSendParams *p = &multifd_send_state->params[i];
+ qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
trace_multifd_send_sync_main_wait(p->id);
qemu_sem_wait(&p->sem_sync);
@@ -668,6 +669,7 @@ static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque)
p->num_packets = 1;
while (true) {
+ qemu_sem_post(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
qemu_sem_wait(&p->sem);
if (qatomic_read(&multifd_send_state->exiting)) {
@@ -736,7 +738,6 @@ static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque)
if (flags & MULTIFD_FLAG_SYNC) {
qemu_sem_post(&p->sem_sync);
}
- qemu_sem_post(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
} else if (p->quit) {
qemu_mutex_unlock(&p->mutex);
break;
--
2.40.0
On 26/04/23 3:58 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
> "manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
>> multifd_send_sync_main() posts request on the multifd channel
>> but does not call sem_wait() on channels_ready semaphore, making
>> the channels_ready semaphore count keep increasing.
>> As a result, sem_wait() on channels_ready in multifd_send_pages()
>> is always non-blocking hence multifd_send_pages() keeps searching
>> for a free channel in a busy loop until a channel is freed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
>> ---
>> migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
>> index cce3ad6988..43d26e7012 100644
>> --- a/migration/multifd.c
>> +++ b/migration/multifd.c
>> @@ -615,6 +615,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
>>
>> trace_multifd_send_sync_main_signal(p->id);
>>
>> + qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
>> qemu_mutex_lock(&p->mutex);
>>
>> if (p->quit) {
> We need this, but I think it is better to put it on the second loop.
>
>> @@ -919,7 +920,7 @@ int multifd_save_setup(Error **errp)
>> multifd_send_state = g_malloc0(sizeof(*multifd_send_state));
>> multifd_send_state->params = g_new0(MultiFDSendParams, thread_count);
>> multifd_send_state->pages = multifd_pages_init(page_count);
>> - qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, 0);
>> + qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, thread_count);
>> qatomic_set(&multifd_send_state->exiting, 0);
>> multifd_send_state->ops = multifd_ops[migrate_multifd_compression()];
> I think this bit is wrong.
> We should not set the channels ready until the thread is ready and
> channel is created.
>
> What do you think about this patch:
>
> From bcb0ef9b97b858458c403d2e4dc9e0dbd96721b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 12:20:36 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] multifd: Fix the number of channels ready
>
> We don't wait in the sem when we are doing a sync_main. Make it wait
> there. To make things clearer, we mark the channel ready at the
> begining of the thread loop.
>
> This causes a busy loop in multifd_send_page().
> Found-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
> ---
> migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
> index 903df2117b..e625e8725e 100644
> --- a/migration/multifd.c
> +++ b/migration/multifd.c
> @@ -635,6 +635,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
> for (i = 0; i < migrate_multifd_channels(); i++) {
> MultiFDSendParams *p = &multifd_send_state->params[i];
>
> + qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
> trace_multifd_send_sync_main_wait(p->id);
> qemu_sem_wait(&p->sem_sync);
>
> @@ -668,6 +669,7 @@ static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque)
> p->num_packets = 1;
>
> while (true) {
> + qemu_sem_post(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
This has one issue though, if we mark channel_ready here itself, channel is actually not ready so we can still busy loop?
May be we can do one thing let the sem_post in while loop at same position itself. But we can do another post just before start
of this while loop, as that will be called only once it should do work of initialising count equal to multiFD channels?
> qemu_sem_wait(&p->sem);
>
> if (qatomic_read(&multifd_send_state->exiting)) {
> @@ -736,7 +738,6 @@ static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque)
> if (flags & MULTIFD_FLAG_SYNC) {
> qemu_sem_post(&p->sem_sync);
> }
> - qemu_sem_post(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
> } else if (p->quit) {
> qemu_mutex_unlock(&p->mutex);
> break;
"manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
> On 26/04/23 3:58 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> "manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
>>> multifd_send_sync_main() posts request on the multifd channel
>>> but does not call sem_wait() on channels_ready semaphore, making
>>> the channels_ready semaphore count keep increasing.
>>> As a result, sem_wait() on channels_ready in multifd_send_pages()
>>> is always non-blocking hence multifd_send_pages() keeps searching
>>> for a free channel in a busy loop until a channel is freed.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
>>> ---
>>> migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
>>> index cce3ad6988..43d26e7012 100644
>>> --- a/migration/multifd.c
>>> +++ b/migration/multifd.c
>>> @@ -615,6 +615,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
>>> trace_multifd_send_sync_main_signal(p->id);
>>> + qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
>>> qemu_mutex_lock(&p->mutex);
>>> if (p->quit) {
>> We need this, but I think it is better to put it on the second loop.
>>
>>> @@ -919,7 +920,7 @@ int multifd_save_setup(Error **errp)
>>> multifd_send_state = g_malloc0(sizeof(*multifd_send_state));
>>> multifd_send_state->params = g_new0(MultiFDSendParams, thread_count);
>>> multifd_send_state->pages = multifd_pages_init(page_count);
>>> - qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, 0);
>>> + qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, thread_count);
>>> qatomic_set(&multifd_send_state->exiting, 0);
>>> multifd_send_state->ops = multifd_ops[migrate_multifd_compression()];
>> I think this bit is wrong.
>> We should not set the channels ready until the thread is ready and
>> channel is created.
>>
>> What do you think about this patch:
>>
>> From bcb0ef9b97b858458c403d2e4dc9e0dbd96721b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
>> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 12:20:36 +0200
>> Subject: [PATCH] multifd: Fix the number of channels ready
>>
>> We don't wait in the sem when we are doing a sync_main. Make it wait
>> there. To make things clearer, we mark the channel ready at the
>> begining of the thread loop.
>>
>> This causes a busy loop in multifd_send_page().
>> Found-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
>> index 903df2117b..e625e8725e 100644
>> --- a/migration/multifd.c
>> +++ b/migration/multifd.c
>> @@ -635,6 +635,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
>> for (i = 0; i < migrate_multifd_channels(); i++) {
>> MultiFDSendParams *p = &multifd_send_state->params[i];
>> + qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
>> trace_multifd_send_sync_main_wait(p->id);
>> qemu_sem_wait(&p->sem_sync);
>> @@ -668,6 +669,7 @@ static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque)
>> p->num_packets = 1;
>> while (true) {
>> + qemu_sem_post(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
>
>
> This has one issue though, if we mark channel_ready here itself, channel is actually not ready so we can still busy loop?
Before:
while (true) {
....
sem_post(channels_ready)
}
And you want to add to the initialization a counter equal to the number
of channels.
Now:
while (true) {
sem_post(channels_ready)
....
}
It is semantically the same, but when we setup it ready it means that
when we set it to 1, we now that the channel and thread are ready for
action.
> May be we can do one thing let the sem_post in while loop at same
> position itself. But we can do another post just before start
I can see how this can make any difference.
> of this while loop, as that will be called only once it should do work
> of initialising count equal to multiFD channels?
Yeap. But I can see what difference do we have here.
Later, Juan.
On 26/04/23 4:35 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
> "manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
>> On 26/04/23 3:58 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>> "manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
>>>> multifd_send_sync_main() posts request on the multifd channel
>>>> but does not call sem_wait() on channels_ready semaphore, making
>>>> the channels_ready semaphore count keep increasing.
>>>> As a result, sem_wait() on channels_ready in multifd_send_pages()
>>>> is always non-blocking hence multifd_send_pages() keeps searching
>>>> for a free channel in a busy loop until a channel is freed.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
>>>> index cce3ad6988..43d26e7012 100644
>>>> --- a/migration/multifd.c
>>>> +++ b/migration/multifd.c
>>>> @@ -615,6 +615,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
>>>> trace_multifd_send_sync_main_signal(p->id);
>>>> + qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
>>>> qemu_mutex_lock(&p->mutex);
>>>> if (p->quit) {
>>> We need this, but I think it is better to put it on the second loop.
>>>
>>>> @@ -919,7 +920,7 @@ int multifd_save_setup(Error **errp)
>>>> multifd_send_state = g_malloc0(sizeof(*multifd_send_state));
>>>> multifd_send_state->params = g_new0(MultiFDSendParams, thread_count);
>>>> multifd_send_state->pages = multifd_pages_init(page_count);
>>>> - qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, 0);
>>>> + qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, thread_count);
>>>> qatomic_set(&multifd_send_state->exiting, 0);
>>>> multifd_send_state->ops = multifd_ops[migrate_multifd_compression()];
>>> I think this bit is wrong.
>>> We should not set the channels ready until the thread is ready and
>>> channel is created.
>>>
>>> What do you think about this patch:
>>>
>>> From bcb0ef9b97b858458c403d2e4dc9e0dbd96721b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
>>> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 12:20:36 +0200
>>> Subject: [PATCH] multifd: Fix the number of channels ready
>>>
>>> We don't wait in the sem when we are doing a sync_main. Make it wait
>>> there. To make things clearer, we mark the channel ready at the
>>> begining of the thread loop.
>>>
>>> This causes a busy loop in multifd_send_page().
>>> Found-by: manish.mishra <manish.mishra@nutanix.com>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>> migration/multifd.c | 3 ++-
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/migration/multifd.c b/migration/multifd.c
>>> index 903df2117b..e625e8725e 100644
>>> --- a/migration/multifd.c
>>> +++ b/migration/multifd.c
>>> @@ -635,6 +635,7 @@ int multifd_send_sync_main(QEMUFile *f)
>>> for (i = 0; i < migrate_multifd_channels(); i++) {
>>> MultiFDSendParams *p = &multifd_send_state->params[i];
>>> + qemu_sem_wait(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
>>> trace_multifd_send_sync_main_wait(p->id);
>>> qemu_sem_wait(&p->sem_sync);
>>> @@ -668,6 +669,7 @@ static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque)
>>> p->num_packets = 1;
>>> while (true) {
>>> + qemu_sem_post(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready);
>>
>> This has one issue though, if we mark channel_ready here itself, channel is actually not ready so we can still busy loop?
> Before:
>
> while (true) {
> ....
> sem_post(channels_ready)
> }
>
> And you want to add to the initialization a counter equal to the number
> of channels.
>
> Now:
>
> while (true) {
> sem_post(channels_ready)
> ....
> }
>
> It is semantically the same, but when we setup it ready it means that
> when we set it to 1, we now that the channel and thread are ready for
> action.
>
>> May be we can do one thing let the sem_post in while loop at same
>> position itself. But we can do another post just before start
> I can see how this can make any difference.
>
>
>> of this while loop, as that will be called only once it should do work
>> of initialising count equal to multiFD channels?
> Yeap. But I can see what difference do we have here.
>
> Later, Juan.
>
Thanks Juan,
Just confirming if i misunderstood something :)
I meant your approach makes sense, i was just suggesting a small change. To do something like this.
qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, 0);
static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque) {
...
sem_post(channels_ready); // Post once at start of thread and let one in loop as it is.
while (true) {
....
sem_post(channels_ready)
}
}
Something like below has issue that we are marking channel_ready even before channel is actually ready, i meant if network is slow it may take some time to update pending_job and hence we can busy loop in send_multifd_page().
static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque) {
...
while (true) {
sem_post(channels_ready);
....
}
}
Not sure if we are already in agreement :) just confirming.
Thanks
Manish Mishra
"manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
> On 26/04/23 4:35 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> "manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
>>> On 26/04/23 3:58 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> Before:
>>
>> while (true) {
>> ....
>> sem_post(channels_ready)
>> }
>>
>> And you want to add to the initialization a counter equal to the number
>> of channels.
>>
>> Now:
>>
>> while (true) {
>> sem_post(channels_ready)
>> ....
>> }
>>
>> It is semantically the same, but when we setup it ready it means that
>> when we set it to 1, we now that the channel and thread are ready for
>> action.
>>
>>> May be we can do one thing let the sem_post in while loop at same
>>> position itself. But we can do another post just before start
>> I can see how this can make any difference.
>>
>>
>>> of this while loop, as that will be called only once it should do work
>>> of initialising count equal to multiFD channels?
>> Yeap. But I can see what difference do we have here.
>>
>> Later, Juan.
>>
>
> Thanks Juan,
> Just confirming if i misunderstood something :)
>
> I meant your approach makes sense, i was just suggesting a small change. To do something like this.
>
> qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, 0);
>
> static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque) {
> ...
>
> sem_post(channels_ready); // Post once at start of thread and let one in loop as it is.
>
> while (true) {
> ....
> sem_post(channels_ready)
> }
> }
>
>
> Something like below has issue that we are marking channel_ready even
> before channel is actually ready,
I think it is exactly the same.
> i meant if network is slow it may
> take some time to update pending_job and hence we can busy loop in
> send_multifd_page().
No difference from send_multifd_page() point of view.
Notice that I mank that the channel is ready before I do any work.
send_multifd_page() does a sem_wait() before doing anything related to
this channel, so I can't see how it can be a differnce.
> static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque) {
> ...
>
> while (true) {
> sem_post(channels_ready);
> ....
> }
> }
>
>
> Not sure if we are already in agreement :) just confirming.
> sem_post(channels_ready); // Post once at start of thread and let one in loop as it is.
> while (true) {
> ...
> sem_post(channels_ready)
> }
and
> while (true) {
> sem_post(channels_ready)
> ...
> }
When "..." is exactly the same don't make any difference, the only
difference is that in one case we "write" to semposts, and in the other
we write just one.
Or I am missing something.
Later, Juan.
On 26/04/23 5:35 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
> "manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
>> On 26/04/23 4:35 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>> "manish.mishra" <manish.mishra@nutanix.com> wrote:
>>>> On 26/04/23 3:58 pm, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>> Before:
>>>
>>> while (true) {
>>> ....
>>> sem_post(channels_ready)
>>> }
>>>
>>> And you want to add to the initialization a counter equal to the number
>>> of channels.
>>>
>>> Now:
>>>
>>> while (true) {
>>> sem_post(channels_ready)
>>> ....
>>> }
>>>
>>> It is semantically the same, but when we setup it ready it means that
>>> when we set it to 1, we now that the channel and thread are ready for
>>> action.
>>>
>>>> May be we can do one thing let the sem_post in while loop at same
>>>> position itself. But we can do another post just before start
>>> I can see how this can make any difference.
>>>
>>>
>>>> of this while loop, as that will be called only once it should do work
>>>> of initialising count equal to multiFD channels?
>>> Yeap. But I can see what difference do we have here.
>>>
>>> Later, Juan.
>>>
>> Thanks Juan,
>> Just confirming if i misunderstood something :)
>>
>> I meant your approach makes sense, i was just suggesting a small change. To do something like this.
>>
>> qemu_sem_init(&multifd_send_state->channels_ready, 0);
>>
>> static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque) {
>> ...
>>
>> sem_post(channels_ready); // Post once at start of thread and let one in loop as it is.
>>
>> while (true) {
>> ....
>> sem_post(channels_ready)
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>> Something like below has issue that we are marking channel_ready even
>> before channel is actually ready,
> I think it is exactly the same.
>
>> i meant if network is slow it may
>> take some time to update pending_job and hence we can busy loop in
>> send_multifd_page().
> No difference from send_multifd_page() point of view.
> Notice that I mank that the channel is ready before I do any work.
>
> send_multifd_page() does a sem_wait() before doing anything related to
> this channel, so I can't see how it can be a differnce.
>
>> static void *multifd_send_thread(void *opaque) {
>> ...
>>
>> while (true) {
>> sem_post(channels_ready);
>> ....
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>> Not sure if we are already in agreement :) just confirming.
>> sem_post(channels_ready); // Post once at start of thread and let one in loop as it is.
>> while (true) {
>> ...
>> sem_post(channels_ready)
>> }
> and
>
>> while (true) {
>> sem_post(channels_ready)
>> ...
>> }
> When "..." is exactly the same don't make any difference, the only
> difference is that in one case we "write" to semposts, and in the other
> we write just one.
>
> Or I am missing something.
>
> Later, Juan.
>
>
yes sorry, i misunderstood techically it does not make any difference. LGTM
Thanks
Manish Mishra
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.