Hi, Without the AioContext lock, a BB's context may kind of change at any time (unless it has a root node, and I/O requests are pending). That also means that its own context (BlockBackend.ctx) and that of its root node can differ sometimes (while the context is being changed).
blk_get_aio_context() doesn't know this yet and asserts that both are always equal (if there is a root node). Because it's no longer true, and because callers don't seem to really care about the root node's context, we can and should remove the assertion and just return the BB's context. Beyond that, the question is whether the callers of blk_get_aio_context() are OK with the context potentially changing concurrently. Honestly, it isn't entirely clear to me; most look OK, except for the virtio-scsi code, which operates under the general assumption that the BB's context is always equal to that of the virtio-scsi device. I doubt that this assumption always holds (it is definitely not obvious to me that it would), but then again, this series will not make matters worse in that regard, and that is what counts for me now. One clear point of contention is scsi_device_for_each_req_async(), which is addressed by patch 2. Right now, it schedules a BH in the BB context, then the BH double-checks whether the context still fits, and if not, re-schedules itself. Because virtio-scsi's context is fixed, this seems to indicate to me that it wants to be able to deal with a case where BB and virtio-scsi context differ, which seems to break that aforementioned general virtio-scsi assumption. Unfortunately, I definitely have to touch that code, because accepting concurrent changes of AioContexts breaks the double-check (just because the BB has the right context in that place does not mean it stays in that context); instead, we must prevent any concurrent change until the BH is done. Because changing contexts generally involves a drained section, we can prevent it by keeping the BB in-flight counter elevated. Question is, how to reason for that. I’d really rather not include the need to follow the BB context in my argument, because I find that part a bit fishy. Luckily, there’s a second, completely different reason for having scsi_device_for_each_req_async() increment the in-flight counter: Specifically, scsi_device_purge_requests() probably wants to await full completion of scsi_device_for_each_req_async(), and we can do that most easily in the very same way by incrementing the in-flight counter. This way, the blk_drain() in scsi_device_purge_requests() will not only await all (cancelled) I/O requests, but also the non-I/O requests. The fact that this prevents the BB AioContext from changing while the BH is scheduled/running then is just a nice side effect. Hanna Czenczek (2): block-backend: Allow concurrent context changes scsi: Await request purging block/block-backend.c | 22 +++++++++++----------- hw/scsi/scsi-bus.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++--------- 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) -- 2.43.0
