A simple true/false internal state does not allow multiple users. Fix
this within the existing interface by converting to a counter, so long
as the counter is elevated, ballooning is inhibited.
Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
---
balloon.c | 7 ++++---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/balloon.c b/balloon.c
index 6bf0a9681377..2a6a7e1a22a0 100644
--- a/balloon.c
+++ b/balloon.c
@@ -37,16 +37,17 @@
static QEMUBalloonEvent *balloon_event_fn;
static QEMUBalloonStatus *balloon_stat_fn;
static void *balloon_opaque;
-static bool balloon_inhibited;
+static int balloon_inhibited;
bool qemu_balloon_is_inhibited(void)
{
- return balloon_inhibited;
+ return balloon_inhibited > 0;
}
void qemu_balloon_inhibit(bool state)
{
- balloon_inhibited = state;
+ balloon_inhibited += (state ? 1 : -1);
+ assert(balloon_inhibited >= 0);
}
static bool have_balloon(Error **errp)
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:47:37PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> A simple true/false internal state does not allow multiple users. Fix
> this within the existing interface by converting to a counter, so long
> as the counter is elevated, ballooning is inhibited.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
> ---
> balloon.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/balloon.c b/balloon.c
> index 6bf0a9681377..2a6a7e1a22a0 100644
> --- a/balloon.c
> +++ b/balloon.c
> @@ -37,16 +37,17 @@
> static QEMUBalloonEvent *balloon_event_fn;
> static QEMUBalloonStatus *balloon_stat_fn;
> static void *balloon_opaque;
> -static bool balloon_inhibited;
> +static int balloon_inhibited;
>
> bool qemu_balloon_is_inhibited(void)
> {
> - return balloon_inhibited;
> + return balloon_inhibited > 0;
> }
>
> void qemu_balloon_inhibit(bool state)
> {
> - balloon_inhibited = state;
> + balloon_inhibited += (state ? 1 : -1);
> + assert(balloon_inhibited >= 0);
Better do it atomically?
> }
>
> static bool have_balloon(Error **errp)
>
>
Regards,
--
Peter Xu
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:40:15 +0800
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:47:37PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > A simple true/false internal state does not allow multiple users. Fix
> > this within the existing interface by converting to a counter, so long
> > as the counter is elevated, ballooning is inhibited.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > balloon.c | 7 ++++---
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/balloon.c b/balloon.c
> > index 6bf0a9681377..2a6a7e1a22a0 100644
> > --- a/balloon.c
> > +++ b/balloon.c
> > @@ -37,16 +37,17 @@
> > static QEMUBalloonEvent *balloon_event_fn;
> > static QEMUBalloonStatus *balloon_stat_fn;
> > static void *balloon_opaque;
> > -static bool balloon_inhibited;
> > +static int balloon_inhibited;
> >
> > bool qemu_balloon_is_inhibited(void)
> > {
> > - return balloon_inhibited;
> > + return balloon_inhibited > 0;
> > }
> >
> > void qemu_balloon_inhibit(bool state)
> > {
> > - balloon_inhibited = state;
> > + balloon_inhibited += (state ? 1 : -1);
> > + assert(balloon_inhibited >= 0);
>
> Better do it atomically?
I'd assumed we're protected by the BQL anywhere this is called. Is
that not the case? Generally when I try to add any sort of locking to
QEMU it's shot down because the code paths are already serialized.
Thanks,
Alex
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:37:36AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:40:15 +0800
> Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 04:47:37PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > A simple true/false internal state does not allow multiple users. Fix
> > > this within the existing interface by converting to a counter, so long
> > > as the counter is elevated, ballooning is inhibited.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > > balloon.c | 7 ++++---
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/balloon.c b/balloon.c
> > > index 6bf0a9681377..2a6a7e1a22a0 100644
> > > --- a/balloon.c
> > > +++ b/balloon.c
> > > @@ -37,16 +37,17 @@
> > > static QEMUBalloonEvent *balloon_event_fn;
> > > static QEMUBalloonStatus *balloon_stat_fn;
> > > static void *balloon_opaque;
> > > -static bool balloon_inhibited;
> > > +static int balloon_inhibited;
> > >
> > > bool qemu_balloon_is_inhibited(void)
> > > {
> > > - return balloon_inhibited;
> > > + return balloon_inhibited > 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > void qemu_balloon_inhibit(bool state)
> > > {
> > > - balloon_inhibited = state;
> > > + balloon_inhibited += (state ? 1 : -1);
> > > + assert(balloon_inhibited >= 0);
> >
> > Better do it atomically?
>
> I'd assumed we're protected by the BQL anywhere this is called. Is
> that not the case? Generally when I try to add any sort of locking to
> QEMU it's shot down because the code paths are already serialized.
Ah I see. :-)
But I guess current code might call these without BQL. For example,
qemu_balloon_inhibit() has:
postcopy_ram_listen_thread
qemu_loadvm_state_main
loadvm_process_command
loadvm_postcopy_handle_listen
postcopy_ram_enable_notify
qemu_balloon_inhibit
While the whole stack is inside a standalone thread to load QEMU for
postcopy incoming migration rather than the main thread.
Thanks,
--
Peter Xu
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.