Re: [PATCH] console: make QMP screendump use coroutine

[Markus Armbruster]

"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <address@hidden> writes:

> * Markus Armbruster (address@hidden) wrote:
[...]
>> Collecting several users before building infrastructure makes sense when
>> the design of the infrastructure isn't obvious, or when the need for it
>> is in doubt.
>> 
>> Neither is the case for running QMP handlers in a coroutine: QMP
>> commands blocking the main loop is without doubt a problem we need to
>> solve, and the way to solve it was obvious enough for Kevin to do it
>> with one user: block_resize.  A second one quickly followed: screendump.
>> 
>> The only part that's different for HMP, I think, is "need".
>> 
>> Is HMP blocking the main loop a problem?
>> 
>> If yes, is it serious enough to justify solving it?
>
> I don't mind if HMP blocks for a small time while doing something, but
> not if it can hang if the guest (or something else like it) misbehaves.
> Not if it's something you might need to issue another command to recover
> from.

The issue isn't HMP being unavailable while a command executes.  The
issue is HMP stopping the main loop while a command executes.

Stopping the main loop not only stops everything running there, it can
also stop other threads when they synchronize with the main loop via the
Big QEMU Lock.

The obvious example is a command accessing a remote filesystem.  Special
case: NFS with the hard option can hang indefinitely.

screendump does that, and also waits for asynchronous gfx_update() with
qxl devices.  Networking again, with a different peer.

We already decided that QMP commands stopping the main loop is serious.

To say it's not serious for HMP amounts to "don't do that then, use
QMP".  Which may be fair.  Not for me to decide, though.