similar to: [PATCH nbdkit NOT WORKING 0/2] vddk: Relax threading model.

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020, 16:16 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > The pool is only used for readonly connections, since writable > connections usually take a lock on the server side and therefore you > cannot open more than one. > --- > plugins/vddk/nbdkit-vddk-plugin.pod | 7 + > plugins/vddk/vddk.c | 201 ++++++++++++++++++++++------ > 2

The pool is only used for readonly connections, since writable connections usually take a lock on the server side and therefore you cannot open more than one. --- plugins/vddk/nbdkit-vddk-plugin.pod | 7 + plugins/vddk/vddk.c | 201 ++++++++++++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 164 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) diff --git a/plugins/vddk/nbdkit-vddk-plugin.pod

In theory this patch depends on this series: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2020-August/msg00021.html In practice I believe they're independent of each other, but the above series makes it easier to test. Rich.

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020, 16:16 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > See comment in code and > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2020-August/msg00023.html > --- > plugins/vddk/vddk.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/plugins/vddk/vddk.c b/plugins/vddk/vddk.c > index c24da96f..5926e181 100644

We had a query yesterday about the VDDK plugin and making it actually obey the weird "Multithreading Considerations" rules in the VDDK documentation (https://vdc-download.vmware.com/vmwb-repository/dcr-public/8f96698a-0e7b-4d67-bb6c-d18a1d101540/ef536a47-27cd-481a-90ef-76b38e75353c/vsphere-vddk-671-programming-guide.pdf) This patch is my attempt to implement this. The idea is that the

Couple of fixes to return correct data and one nice-to-have clean-up which is not needed. I just find it nicer to read. Martin Kletzander (3): vddk: Use a separate handle for single-link=true vddk: Do not report hole extents to be zero with single-link=true vddk: Eliminate one needless goto plugins/vddk/vddk.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 36

This is my second attempt at this. The first version (also not working) was here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-October/msg00062.html In part 1/2 I introduce a new .ready_to_serve plugin method which is called after forking and just before accepting any client connection. The idea would be that plugins could start background threads here. However this doesn't work well in

On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 02:39:44PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > Can we use something like the file plugin? thread pool of workers, > each keeping open vddk handle, and serving requests in parallel from > the same nbd socket? Yes, but this isn't implemented in the plugins, it's implemented in the server. The server always uses a thread pool, but plugins can opt for more or less

See comment in code and https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2020-August/msg00023.html --- plugins/vddk/vddk.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/plugins/vddk/vddk.c b/plugins/vddk/vddk.c index 31e58f66..95e030d4 100644 --- a/plugins/vddk/vddk.c +++ b/plugins/vddk/vddk.c @@ -511,17 +511,29 @@ vddk_dump_plugin (void) #endif

See comment in code and https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2020-August/msg00023.html --- plugins/vddk/vddk.c | 17 +++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/plugins/vddk/vddk.c b/plugins/vddk/vddk.c index c24da96f..5926e181 100644 --- a/plugins/vddk/vddk.c +++ b/plugins/vddk/vddk.c @@ -478,11 +478,18 @@ vddk_dump_plugin (void) #endif } -/* XXX To

On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 03:40:43PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 2:58 PM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 02:39:44PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > > > Can we use something like the file plugin? thread pool of workers, > > > each keeping open vddk handle, and serving requests in parallel from >

Not sure what version we're up to, but this reimplements extents using the new simpler structure described in this thread: https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2019-March/msg00077.html I also fixed most of the things that Eric pointed out in the previous review, although I need to go back over his replies and check I've got everything. This needs a bit more testing. However the

Probably needs a bit of cleanup, but seems like it is generally the right direction. One thing I've noticed is that the expect test randomly (but rarely) hangs :-( I guess something is racey but I don't know what at the moment. Rich.

When using VIXDISKLIB_FLAG_OPEN_SINGLE_LINK, parent images are not taken into account. However, the data we get from VixDiskLib_QueryAllocatedBlocks() has such granularity that it might return incorrect information. For example when the top image has only one block allocated, we get information about the whole chunk being allocated. This results in the consequent read to return invalid data -

I'm not sure exactly which version we're up to, but let's say it's version 4. I'm a lot happier with this version: - all filters have been reviewed and changed where I think that's necessary - can_extents is properly defined and implemented now - NBD protocol is followed - I believe it addresses all previous review points where possible The "only" thing

I want to post this but mainly for discussion and early review. It's not safe for these patches to all go upstream yet (because not all filters have been checked/adjusted), but if any patches were to go upstream then probably 1 & 2 only are safe. File, VDDK, memory and data plugins all work, although I have only done minimal testing on them. The current tests, such as they are, all

I suppose we may as well implement the only other flag too ... It's not clear what this does, something like O_DIRECT I imagine. Rich.

This has already been pushed upstream. I am simply posting these here so we have a reference in the mailing list in case we find bugs later (as I'm sure we will - it's a complex patch series). Great thanks to Eric Blake for tireless review on this one. It also seems to have identified a few minor bugs in qemu along the way. Rich.

From: Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@redhat.com> --- plugins/vddk/nbdkit-vddk-plugin.pod | 7 ++++++- plugins/vddk/vddk-structs.h | 1 + plugins/vddk/vddk.c | 10 ++++++++++ 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/plugins/vddk/nbdkit-vddk-plugin.pod

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 2:58 PM Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 02:39:44PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > > Can we use something like the file plugin? thread pool of workers, > > each keeping open vddk handle, and serving requests in parallel from > > the same nbd socket? > > Yes, but this isn't implemented in the