Re: [Qemu-block] [RFC PATCH V3] qemu-img: make convert async

Von: Kevin Wolf <address@hidden>
An: Peter Lieven <address@hidden>
Kopie: <address@hidden>, <address@hidden>, <address@hidden>, <address@hidden>
Gesendet: 14.02.2017 17:20
Betreff: Re: [RFC PATCH V3] qemu-img: make convert async

Am 14.02.2017 um 14:39 hat Peter Lieven geschrieben:
> this is something I have been thinking about for almost 2 years now.
> we heavily have the following two use cases when using qemu-img convert.
>
> a) reading from NFS and writing to iSCSI for deploying templates
> b) reading from iSCSI and writing to NFS for backups
>
> In both processes we use libiscsi and libnfs so we have no kernel pagecache.
> As qemu-img convert is implemented with sync operations that means we
> read one buffer and then write it. No parallelism and each sync request
> takes as long as it takes until it is completed.
>
> This is version 3 of the approach using coroutine worker "threads".
>
> So far I have the following runtimes when reading an uncompressed QCOW2 from
> NFS and writing it to iSCSI (raw):
>
> qemu-img (master)
> nfs -> iscsi 22.8 secs
> nfs -> ram 11.7 secs
> ram -> iscsi 12.3 secs
>
> qemu-img-async
> nfs -> iscsi 12.3 secs
> nfs -> ram 10.5 secs
> ram -> iscsi 11.7 secs
>
> Comments appreciated.
>
> Thank you,
> Peter
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Lieven <address@hidden>
> ---
> v2->v3: - updated stats in the commit msg from a host with a better network card
> - only wake up the coroutine that is acutally waiting for a write to complete.
> this was not only overhead, but also breaking at least linux AIO.
> - fix coding style complaints
> - rename some variables and structs
>
> v1->v2: - using coroutine as worker "threads". [Max]
> - keeping the request queue as otherwise it happens
> that we wait on BLK_ZERO chunks while keeping the write order.
> it also avoids redundant calls to get_block_status and helps
> to skip some conditions for fully allocated imaged (!s->min_sparse)
>
> qemu-img.c | 213 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 145 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/qemu-img.c b/qemu-img.c
> index cff22e3..970863f 100644
> --- a/qemu-img.c
> +++ b/qemu-img.c
> @@ -1448,6 +1448,16 @@ enum ImgConvertBlockStatus {
> BLK_BACKING_FILE,
> };
>
> +typedef struct ImgConvertRequest {
> + int64_t sector_num;
> + enum ImgConvertBlockStatus status;
> + int nb_sectors;
> + QSIMPLEQ_ENTRY(ImgConvertRequest) next;
> +} ImgConvertRequest;

If I understand your code correctly, you first go through the image and
create an ImgConvertRequest for every chunk with the same allocation
status (well, actually not every chunk, but that may be a bug, see
below).

So let's assume a 1 TB image with every other cluster allocated:

1T / (64k * 2) = 8M

A list with 8 million entries (requiring 8 million mallocs) feels
relatively large. Not counting malloc overhead (which might be
considerable here), I think we're at 192 MB memory usage for this case.
Not as bad as I was afraid, but not really nice either. And 1 TB isn't
even close to the maximum image size.

Is it really necessary to create this list at the beginning? Why can't
we just get the next chunk as the old code used to?

In my initial version with AIO invoking convert_iterate_sectors caused

recursive entries into my queue_fill functions. If I have fixed worker threads

or only a few coroutines for read/write whatsever this might work without.

I will have a look. In my test cases I don't have such heavily fragmented

images. I was at a few hundred entries at most.

The other issue I feared was that the "cache" in convert_iterate_sectors

does not work correctly. But if the calls to this function are still in increasing

sector order, it should work.

> +/* XXX: this should be a cmdline parameter */
> +#define NUM_COROUTINES 8
> +
> typedef struct ImgConvertState {
> BlockBackend **src;
> int64_t *src_sectors;
> @@ -1455,6 +1465,8 @@ typedef struct ImgConvertState {
> int64_t src_cur_offset;
> int64_t total_sectors;
> int64_t allocated_sectors;
> + int64_t allocated_done;
> + int64_t wr_offs;
> enum ImgConvertBlockStatus status;
> int64_t sector_next_status;
> BlockBackend *target;
> @@ -1464,11 +1476,16 @@ typedef struct ImgConvertState {
> int min_sparse;
> size_t cluster_sectors;
> size_t buf_sectors;
> + Coroutine *co[NUM_COROUTINES];
> + int64_t wait_sector_num[NUM_COROUTINES];
> + QSIMPLEQ_HEAD(, ImgConvertRequest) queue;
> + int ret;
> } ImgConvertState;
>
> static void convert_select_part(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num)
> {
> - assert(sector_num >= s->src_cur_offset);
> + s->src_cur_offset = 0;
> + s->src_cur = 0;
> while (sector_num - s->src_cur_offset >= s->src_sectors[s->src_cur]) {
> s->src_cur_offset += s->src_sectors[s->src_cur];
> s->src_cur++;

Is this necessary because we can effectively go backwards now when one
coroutine works already on the next part, but another one is still
processing the previous one? Worth a comment?

Exactly that is the problem. I will add a comment.

> @@ -1544,11 +1561,13 @@ static int convert_iteration_sectors(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num)
> return n;
> }
>
> -static int convert_read(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors,
> - uint8_t *buf)
> +static int convert_co_read(ImgConvertState *s, ImgConvertRequest *req,
> + uint8_t *buf, QEMUIOVector *qiov)

This is a weird interface: You want to get a created, but empty qiov
from the caller. There's no real point in that. The traditional approch
is having a struct iovec on the stack here locally and then using
qemu_iovec_init_external().

The idea was to avoid the qemu_iovec every time because this involves a malloc,

but I admit its not nice. Maybe I find a better approach.

> {
> int n;
> int ret;
> + int64_t sector_num = req->sector_num;
> + int nb_sectors = req->nb_sectors;
>
> assert(nb_sectors <= s->buf_sectors);
> while (nb_sectors > 0) {
> @@ -1562,10 +1581,13 @@ static int convert_read(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors,
> blk = s->src[s->src_cur];
> bs_sectors = s->src_sectors[s->src_cur];
>
> + qemu_iovec_reset(qiov);
> n = MIN(nb_sectors, bs_sectors - (sector_num - s->src_cur_offset));
> - ret = blk_pread(blk,
> - (sector_num - s->src_cur_offset) << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
> - buf, n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS);
> + qemu_iovec_add(qiov, buf, n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS);
> +
> + ret = blk_co_preadv(
> + blk, (sector_num - s->src_cur_offset) << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
> + n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS, qiov, 0);
> if (ret < 0) {
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -1578,15 +1600,18 @@ static int convert_read(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int convert_write(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors,
> - const uint8_t *buf)
> +
> +static int convert_co_write(ImgConvertState *s, ImgConvertRequest *req,
> + uint8_t *buf, QEMUIOVector *qiov)

Same thing here.

Note that convert_write() used to be called unconditionally. This is not
the case any more because you don't create ImgConvertRequests
unconditionally. In particular, BLK_ZERO is skipped without -S 0 instead
of doing a blk_co_pwrite_zeroes(). This is a bug. The assertion in the
BLK_BACKING_FILE branch of the switch is also dead code now.

You are right. This needs to be fixed.

> {
> int ret;
> + int64_t sector_num = req->sector_num;
> + int nb_sectors = req->nb_sectors;
>
> while (nb_sectors > 0) {
> int n = nb_sectors;
> -
> - switch (s->status) {
> + qemu_iovec_reset(qiov);
> + switch (req->status) {
> case BLK_BACKING_FILE:
> /* If we have a backing file, leave clusters unallocated that are
> * unallocated in the source image, so that the backing file is
> @@ -1607,9 +1632,10 @@ static int convert_write(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors,
> break;
> }
>
> - ret = blk_pwrite_compressed(s->target,
> - sector_num << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
> - buf, n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS);
> + qemu_iovec_add(qiov, buf, n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS);
> + ret = blk_co_pwritev(s->target, sector_num << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
> + n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS, qiov,
> + BDRV_REQ_WRITE_COMPRESSED);
> if (ret < 0) {
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -1622,8 +1648,9 @@ static int convert_write(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors,
> if (!s->min_sparse ||
> is_allocated_sectors_min(buf, n, &n, s->min_sparse))
> {
> - ret = blk_pwrite(s->target, sector_num << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
> - buf, n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS, 0);
> + qemu_iovec_add(qiov, buf, n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS);
> + ret = blk_co_pwritev(s->target, sector_num << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
> + n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS, qiov, 0);
> if (ret < 0) {
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -1635,8 +1662,9 @@ static int convert_write(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors,
> if (s->has_zero_init) {
> break;
> }
> - ret = blk_pwrite_zeroes(s->target, sector_num << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
> - n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS, 0);
> + ret = blk_co_pwrite_zeroes(s->target,
> + sector_num << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS,
> + n << BDRV_SECTOR_BITS, 0);
> if (ret < 0) {
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -1651,12 +1679,92 @@ static int convert_write(ImgConvertState *s, int64_t sector_num, int nb_sectors,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int convert_do_copy(ImgConvertState *s)
> +static void convert_co_do_copy(void *opaque)
> {
> + ImgConvertState *s = opaque;
> uint8_t *buf = NULL;
> - int64_t sector_num, allocated_done;
> + int ret, i;
> + ImgConvertRequest *req, *next_req;
> + QEMUIOVector qiov;
> + int index = -1;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < NUM_COROUTINES; i++) {
> + if (s->co[i] == qemu_coroutine_self()) {
> + index = i;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> + assert(index >= 0);
> +
> + qemu_iovec_init(&qiov, 1);
> + buf = blk_blockalign(s->target, s->buf_sectors * BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE);
> +
> + while (s->ret == -EINPROGRESS && (req = QSIMPLEQ_FIRST(&s->queue))) {
> + QSIMPLEQ_REMOVE_HEAD(&s->queue, next);
> + next_req = QSIMPLEQ_FIRST(&s->queue);
> +
> + s->allocated_done += req->nb_sectors;
> + qemu_progress_print(100.0 * s->allocated_done / s->allocated_sectors,
> + 0);
> +
> + if (req->status == BLK_DATA) {
> + ret = convert_co_read(s, req, buf, &qiov);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + error_report("error while reading sector %" PRId64
> + ": %s", req->sector_num, strerror(-ret));
> + s->ret = ret;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* keep writes in order */
> + while (s->wr_offs != req->sector_num) {
> + if (s->ret != -EINPROGRESS) {
> + goto out;
> + }
> + s->wait_sector_num[index] = req->sector_num;
> + qemu_coroutine_yield();
> + }
> + s->wait_sector_num[index] = -1;

Okay, so may this is the most important part of the patch.

If we need to keep writes in order, we can only have a single coroutine
that is currently writing. Then how likely is it that more than one
other coroutine could actually be reading at the same time rather than
just waiting for the current writer to be finished?

My assumption is that it effectively degenerates to exactly one reader
and one writer, which means that we don't actually need a command line
option to configure the number of coroutines, and that our default of 8
is already higher than useful.

I will check the result for 4 and 2 coroutines. My observation or fear was

that a read and write that are effectively no-ops (BLK_ZERO with s->has_zero_init)

could block the queue and avoid to read ahead.

The big question is then if the code could become simpler if we can
assume exactly two coroutines. Possibly even not two coroutines that do
the same thing, but one that reads and another one that writes,
coordinated with the usual coroutine locking mechanisms. (I haven't
thought enough about it to be sure that it would be an improvement, but
it doesn't feel too unlikely.)

On the other hand, if keeping writes in order is only actually needed in
specific cases, other cases could benefit from actual parallelism, even
though this is not implemented in this patch.

I tried to disable it. It has had no influence for my test scenario. But with

the current approach such a switch as well as a switch to define the number

of workers could easily be implemented. Having multiple readers (and maybe writers)

should increase performance if there is latency involved.

Before I rewrite everything I would propose to try to change the code

to avoid to build the request queue upfront and analyze what a change in number

of coroutines has in the current and the version without request queue?

If we would have a read and a write coroutine and maybe a third (to calculate the request

size with convert_iterate_sectors) my idea would be to have a limited request queue.

That is passed from coroutine to coroutine.

queue 1: free request object

fifo queue 2: request objects ready for reading

fifo queue 3: request objects ready for writing.

The first coroutine would fetch the a free request object and calculate nb_sectors and status and

put it into queue 2.

Then the reader coroutine would fetch the next read object in order and perform the read. Once

finisched it puts the object into the queue 3.

Then the writer coroutine handles the write and when the write is finished it puts it back into

into the freelist (queue 1).

Thanks for your comments,

From:	Peter Lieven
Subject:	Re: [Qemu-block] [RFC PATCH V3] qemu-img: make convert async
Date:	Tue, 14 Feb 2017 21:43:02 +0100