Support larger NBD_CMD_WRITE_ZEROES
cover Support larger NBD_CMD_WRITE_ZEROES
This is my counterproposal for:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-02/msg02107.html
where Edgar pointed out that NBD write zero requests are rather inefficient because the NBD spec was ambiguous on whether we could exceed an advertised maximum request size even when the command carries no payload, and so for maximum compatibility with unknown NBD partners, we erred on the conservative side.
The NBD spec has since been improved to mention that a client can try a larger WRITE_ZEROES if it is prepared to handle an EINVAL, and that a server should not hang up on overlarge requests that did not include a payload. But in the process it was pointed out that even better would be improving the spec to advertise both limits (the READ/WRITE payload limit, and the larger TRIM/ZERO limit), as done in this series.
With this in place, qemu as both NBD client and server can send zero requests up to BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES (nearly 2G) in length, rather than having to subdivide the request into 32M chunks.
This series is experimental until the NBD spec is actually modified to document the feature added here; but that modification will be easier now that I have a proof-of-concept implementation.
Eric Blake (4):
nbd: Prepare for additional block sizing info nbd/client: Refactor in preparation for more limits nbd/client: Support requests of additional block sizing info nbd/server: Support requests of additional block sizing info
include/block/nbd.h | 8 +++- block/nbd.c | 15 +++++- nbd/client.c | 135 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- nbd/common.c | 4 ++ nbd/server.c | 30 ++++++++++++ nbd/trace-events | 4 ++ 6 files changed, 181 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.14.3
PATCH 1/4 nbd: Prepare for additional block sizing info
The NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Add the constants and name lookups for new NBD_INFO_ fields used during handshake to convey this additional information. Note that the NBD spec already requires servers to ignore unknown requests from the client, and for clients to ignore unknown gratuitous responses sent from the server.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/nbd/2018/03/msg00048.html
---
The given URL for the NBD spec was v3; it will change to be a v4 version of that patch in part to point back to this qemu commit as a proof of implementation.
--- include/block/nbd.h | 4 +++- nbd/common.c | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
include/block/nbd.h +3 -1
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@/* -* Copyright (C) 2016-2017 Red Hat, Inc. +* Copyright (C) 2016-2018 Red Hat, Inc. * Copyright (C) 2005 Anthony Liguori <[email protected]> * * Network Block Device
@@ -180,6 +180,8 @@ typedef struct NBDExtent {#define NBD_INFO_NAME 1#define NBD_INFO_DESCRIPTION 2#define NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE 3 +#define NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE 4 +#define NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE 5/* Request flags, sent from client to server during transmission phase */ #define NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA (1 << 0)/* 'force unit access' during write */
nbd/common.c +4 -0
@@ -129,6 +129,10 @@ const char *nbd_info_lookup(uint16_t info)return "description" ;case NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE :return "block size" ; +case NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE : +return "trim size" ; +case NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE : +return "zero size" ;default :return "<unknown>" ; }
Signature · 1 line
2.14.3
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] nbd: Prepare for additional block sizing info
Quoted 9 lines · Eric Blake
The NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Add the constants and name lookups for new
NBD_INFO_fields used during handshake to convey this additional information. Note that the NBD spec already requires servers to ignore unknown requests from the client, and for clients to ignore unknown gratuitous responses sent from the server.
Quoted 3 lines
[1] https://lists.debian.org/nbd/2018/03/msg00048.html
Signed-off-by Eric Blake <[email protected]>
Quoted 46 lines
---
The given URL for the NBD spec was v3; it will change to be a v4 version of that patch in part to point back to this qemu commit as a proof of implementation.
--- include/block/nbd.h | 4 +++- nbd/common.c | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)include/block/nbd.h +3
-1@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@/* -* Copyright (C) 2016-2017 Red Hat, Inc. +* Copyright (C) 2016-2018 Red Hat, Inc. * Copyright (C) 2005 Anthony Liguori <[email protected]> * * Network Block Device @@ -180,6 +180,8 @@ typedef struct NBDExtent {#define NBD_INFO_NAME 1#define NBD_INFO_DESCRIPTION 2#define NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE 3 +#define NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE 4 +#define NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE 5/* Request flags, sent from client to server during transmission phase */ #define NBD_CMD_FLAG_FUA (1 << 0)/* 'force unit access' during write */ nbd/common.c +4
-0@@ -129,6 +129,10 @@ const char *nbd_info_lookup(uint16_t info)return "description" ;case NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE :return "block size" ; +case NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE : +return "trim size" ; +case NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE : +return "zero size" ;default :return "<unknown>" ; }
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Vladimir
PATCH 2/4 nbd/client: Refactor in preparation for more limits
In reply to Eric BlakeThe next patch will ask the server for more items of NBD_INFO. However, the server is free to respond with INFO items in a different order than what we request, so performing any sanity checks about constraints that occur between multiple INFO items must be done after all items have been received. Make it easier to see that such checks are last by sinking the final processing after the while loop, rather than embedded in the NBD_REP_ACK processing that occurs textually within the loop before other INFO processing.
--- nbd/client.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
nbd/client.c +11 -8
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@/* -* Copyright (C) 2016-2017 Red Hat, Inc. +* Copyright (C) 2016-2018 Red Hat, Inc. * Copyright (C) 2005 Anthony Liguori <[email protected]> * * Network Block Device Client Side
@@ -365,17 +365,12 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname,if (reply.type ==NBD_REP_ACK ) {/* Server is done sending info and moved into transmission -phase, but make sure it sent flags */ +phase */ if (len) {error_setg (errp,"server sent invalid NBD_REP_ACK" );return -1 ; } -if (!info->flags) { -error_setg (errp,"broken server omitted NBD_INFO_EXPORT" ); -return -1 ; - } -trace_nbd_opt_go_success (); -return 1 ; +break ; }if (reply.type !=NBD_REP_INFO ) { error_setg(errp, "unexpected reply type %" PRIu32
@@ -482,6 +477,14 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname,break ; } } + +/* Sanity check that server's responses make sense */ +if (!info->flags) { +error_setg (errp,"broken server omitted NBD_INFO_EXPORT" ); +return -1 ; + } +trace_nbd_opt_go_success (); +return 1 ; }/* Return -1 on failure, 0 if wantname is an available export. */
Signature · 1 line
2.14.3
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/4] nbd/client: Refactor in preparation for more limits
Quoted 11 lines · Eric Blake
The next patch will ask the server for more items of
NBD_INFO. However, the server is free to respond with INFO items in a different order than what we request, so performing any sanity checks about constraints that occur between multiple INFO items must be done after all items have been received. Make it easier to see that such checks are last by sinking the final processing after the while loop, rather than embedded in theNBD_REP_ACKprocessing that occurs textually within the loop before other INFO processing.Signed-off-by Eric Blake <[email protected]>
Quoted 50 lines
--- nbd/client.c | 19 +++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)nbd/client.c +11
-8@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@/* -* Copyright (C) 2016-2017 Red Hat, Inc. +* Copyright (C) 2016-2018 Red Hat, Inc. * Copyright (C) 2005 Anthony Liguori <[email protected]> * * Network Block Device Client Side @@ -365,17 +365,12 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname,if (reply.type ==NBD_REP_ACK ) {/* Server is done sending info and moved into transmission -phase, but make sure it sent flags */ +phase */ if (len) {error_setg (errp,"server sent invalid NBD_REP_ACK" );return -1 ; } -if (!info->flags) { -error_setg (errp,"broken server omitted NBD_INFO_EXPORT" ); -return -1 ; - } -trace_nbd_opt_go_success (); -return 1 ; +break ; }if (reply.type !=NBD_REP_INFO ) { error_setg(errp, "unexpected reply type %" PRIu32@@ -482,6 +477,14 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname,break ; } } + +/* Sanity check that server's responses make sense */ +if (!info->flags) { +error_setg (errp,"broken server omitted NBD_INFO_EXPORT" ); +return -1 ; + } +trace_nbd_opt_go_success (); +return 1 ; }/* Return -1 on failure, 0 if wantname is an available export. */
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Vladimir
PATCH 3/4 nbd/client: Support requests of additional block sizing info
In reply to Eric BlakeThe NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Implement the client side support for these alternate limits, by always requesting the new information (a compliant server must ignore the request if it is unknown), and by validating anything reported by the server before populating the block layer limits.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/nbd/2018/03/msg00048.html
---
The given URL for the NBD spec was v3; it will change to be a v4 version of that patch in part to point back to this qemu commit as a proof of implementation.
--- include/block/nbd.h | 4 ++ block/nbd.c | 15 ++++++- nbd/client.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- nbd/trace-events | 2 + 4 files changed, 131 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
include/block/nbd.h +4 -0
@@ -270,6 +270,10 @@ struct NBDExportInfo {uint32_t min_block;uint32_t opt_block;uint32_t max_block; +uint32_t min_trim; +uint32_t max_trim; +uint32_t min_zero; +uint32_t max_zero;uint32_t meta_base_allocation_id; };
block/nbd.c +13 -2
@@ -478,8 +478,19 @@ static void nbd_refresh_limits(BlockDriverState *bs, Error **errp)uint32_t max =MIN_NON_ZERO (NBD_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE , s->info.max_block); bs->bl.request_alignment = min ? min :BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE ; - bs->bl.max_pdiscard = max; - bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes = max; +if (s->info.max_trim) { + bs->bl.max_pdiscard =MIN (s->info.max_trim,BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES ); + }else { + bs->bl.max_pdiscard = max; + } + bs->bl.pdiscard_alignment = s->info.min_trim; +if (s->info.max_zero) { + bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes =MIN (s->info.max_zero, +BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES ); + }else { + bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes = max; + } + bs->bl.pwrite_zeroes_alignment = s->info.min_zero; bs->bl.max_transfer = max; if (s->info.opt_block &&
nbd/client.c +112 -4
140 lines not on this page · raw message
nbd/trace-events +2 -0
@@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ nbd_opt_go_start(const char *name) "Attempting NBD_OPT_GO for export '%s'" nbd_opt_go_success(void) "Export is good to go" nbd_opt_go_info_unknown(int info, const char *name) "Ignoring unknown info %d (%s)" nbd_opt_go_info_block_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t preferred, uint32_t maximum) "Block sizes are 0x%" PRIx32 ", 0x%" PRIx32 ", 0x%" PRIx32 +nbd_opt_go_info_trim_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t maximum) "Trim sizes are 0x%" PRIx32 ", 0x%" PRIx32 +nbd_opt_go_info_zero_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t maximum) "Zero sizes are 0x%" PRIx32 ", 0x%" PRIx32 nbd_receive_query_exports_start(const char *wantname) "Querying export list for '%s'" nbd_receive_query_exports_success(const char *wantname) "Found desired export name '%s'" nbd_receive_starttls_new_client(void) "Setting up TLS"
Signature · 1 line
2.14.3
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] nbd/client: Support requests of additional block sizing info
Quoted 70 lines · Eric Blake
The NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Implement the client side support for these alternate limits, by always requesting the new information (a compliant server must ignore the request if it is unknown), and by validating anything reported by the server before populating the block layer limits.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/nbd/2018/03/msg00048.html
Signed-off-by Eric Blake <[email protected]>---
The given URL for the NBD spec was v3; it will change to be a v4 version of that patch in part to point back to this qemu commit as a proof of implementation.
--- include/block/nbd.h | 4 ++ block/nbd.c | 15 ++++++- nbd/client.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- nbd/trace-events | 2 + 4 files changed, 131 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)include/block/nbd.h +4
-0@@ -270,6 +270,10 @@ struct NBDExportInfo {uint32_t min_block;uint32_t opt_block;uint32_t max_block; +uint32_t min_trim; +uint32_t max_trim; +uint32_t min_zero; +uint32_t max_zero;uint32_t meta_base_allocation_id; };block/nbd.c +13
-2@@ -478,8 +478,19 @@ static void nbd_refresh_limits(BlockDriverState *bs, Error **errp)uint32_t max =MIN_NON_ZERO (NBD_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE , s->info.max_block); bs->bl.request_alignment = min ? min :BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE ; - bs->bl.max_pdiscard = max; - bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes = max; +if (s->info.max_trim) { + bs->bl.max_pdiscard =MIN (s->info.max_trim,BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES ); + }else { + bs->bl.max_pdiscard = max; + } + bs->bl.pdiscard_alignment = s->info.min_trim; +if (s->info.max_zero) { + bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes =MIN (s->info.max_zero, +BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES ); + }else { + bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes = max; + } + bs->bl.pwrite_zeroes_alignment = s->info.min_zero; bs->bl.max_transfer = max; if (s->info.opt_block &&nbd/client.c +0
-0
nbd/client.c static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname, · line 340
Quoted 5 lines
nbd/client.c +1
-1@@ -337,16 +337,18 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname, info->flags =0 ;trace_nbd_opt_go_start (wantname); - buf =g_malloc (4 + len +2 +2 * info->request_sizes +1 ); + buf =g_malloc (4 + len +2 +3 *2 * info->request_sizes +1 );
Hmm, what "+1" means?
Quoted 5 lines
nbd/client.c +1
-2stl_be_p (buf, len);memcpy (buf +4 , wantname, len); -/* At most one request, everything else up to server */ -stw_be_p (buf +4 + len, info->request_sizes); +/* Either 0 or 3 requests, everything else up to server */
nbd/client.c static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname, · line 352
Quoted 10 lines
nbd/client.c +4
-1+stw_be_p (buf +4 + len,3 * info->request_sizes);if (info->request_sizes) {stw_be_p (buf +4 + len +2 ,NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE ); +stw_be_p (buf +4 + len +2 +2 ,NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE ); +stw_be_p (buf +4 + len +2 +2 +2 ,NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE ); } error =nbd_send_option_request (ioc,NBD_OPT_GO , -4 + len +2 +2 * info->request_sizes, +4 + len +2 +3 *2 * info->request_sizes, buf, errp);
magic chunk) Change looks correct. Is it worth introducing a buf_len variable, to not retype it?
Quoted 26 lines
nbd/client.c +20
-0g_free (buf);if (error <0 ) {@@ -467,6 +469,72 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname, info->max_block);break ; +case NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE : +if (len !=sizeof (info->min_trim) *2 ) { +error_setg (errp,"remaining trim info len %" PRIu32 +" is unexpected size" , len); +nbd_send_opt_abort (ioc); +return -1 ; + } +if (nbd_read (ioc, &info->min_trim,sizeof (info->min_trim), + errp) <0 ) { +error_prepend (errp,"failed to read info minimum trim size: " ); +nbd_send_opt_abort (ioc); +return -1 ; + } +be32_to_cpus (&info->min_trim); +if (nbd_read (ioc, &info->max_trim,sizeof (info->max_trim), + errp) <0 ) { +error_prepend (errp, +"failed to read info maximum trim size: " ); +nbd_send_opt_abort (ioc); +return -1 ;
nbd/client.c static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname, · line 501
Quoted 10 lines
nbd/client.c +10
-0+ } +be32_to_cpus (&info->max_trim); +if (!info->min_trim || !info->max_trim || + (info->max_trim !=UINT32_MAX && + !QEMU_IS_ALIGNED (info->max_trim, info->min_trim))) { +error_setg (errp,"server trim sizes %" PRIu32"/%" PRIu32 +" are not valid" , info->min_trim, info->max_trim); +nbd_send_opt_abort (ioc); +return -1 ; + }
Didn't you forget to check that min_trim is a power of two?
Quoted 26 lines
nbd/client.c +26
-0+trace_nbd_opt_go_info_trim_size (info->min_trim, info->max_trim); +break ; + +case NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE : +if (len !=sizeof (info->min_zero) *2 ) { +error_setg (errp,"remaining zero info len %" PRIu32 +" is unexpected size" , len); +nbd_send_opt_abort (ioc); +return -1 ; + } +if (nbd_read (ioc, &info->min_zero,sizeof (info->min_zero), + errp) <0 ) { +error_prepend (errp,"failed to read info minimum zero size: " ); +nbd_send_opt_abort (ioc); +return -1 ; + } +be32_to_cpus (&info->min_zero); +if (nbd_read (ioc, &info->max_zero,sizeof (info->max_zero), + errp) <0 ) { +error_prepend (errp, +"failed to read info maximum zero size: " ); +nbd_send_opt_abort (ioc); +return -1 ; + } +be32_to_cpus (&info->max_zero); + if (!info->min_zero || !info->max_zero ||
nbd/client.c static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname, · line 537
Quoted 10 lines
nbd/client.c +10
-0+ (info->max_zero != UINT32_MAX && + !QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(info->max_zero, info->min_zero))) { +error_setg (errp,"server zero sizes %" PRIu32"/%" PRIu32 +" are not valid" , info->min_zero, info->max_zero); +nbd_send_opt_abort (ioc); +return -1 ; + } +trace_nbd_opt_go_info_zero_size (info->min_zero, info->max_zero); +break ; +
hmm, so, now nbd_opt_go() is full of very-very similar code parts, which may worth some refactoring now or in future.
Are we going to add similar limits for BLOCK_STATUS? and for CACHE? I have an idea: why not to make an universal option for it in protocol? Something like
option INFO_CMD_SIZE:
uint16_t command
uint32_t min_block
uint32_t max_block
and server can send several such options. Most of semantics for these additional limits are common, so it will simplify both documentation and realization..
I'll copy this to nbd thread and it is better to discuss it in it.
Quoted 63 lines
nbd/client.c +40
-0default :trace_nbd_opt_go_info_unknown (type,nbd_info_lookup (type));if (nbd_drop (ioc, len, errp) <0 ) {@@ -483,6 +551,46 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname,error_setg (errp,"broken server omitted NBD_INFO_EXPORT" );return -1 ; } +if (info->min_trim) { +if (!info->min_block) { +error_setg (errp,"broken server sent INFO_TRIM_SIZE without" +" INFO_BLOCK_SIZE" ); +return -1 ; + } +if (info->min_trim < info->opt_block) { +error_setg (errp,"broken server sent INFO_TRIM_SIZE with" +" minimum trim %" PRIu32" less than preferred block %" + PRIu32, info->min_trim, info->opt_block); +return -1 ; + } +if (info->max_trim < info->max_block) { +error_setg (errp,"broken server sent INFO_TRIM_SIZE with" +" maximum trim %" PRIu32" less than maximum block %" + PRIu32, info->max_trim, info->max_block); +return -1 ; + } + info->max_trim =QEMU_ALIGN_DOWN (info->max_trim, info->min_block); + } +if (info->min_zero) { +if (!info->min_block) { +error_setg (errp,"broken server sent INFO_ZERO_SIZE without" +" INFO_BLOCK_SIZE" ); +return -1 ; + } +if (info->min_zero < info->opt_block) { +error_setg (errp,"broken server sent INFO_ZERO_SIZE with" +" minimum zero %" PRIu32" less than preferred block %" + PRIu32, info->min_zero, info->opt_block); +return -1 ; + } +if (info->max_zero < info->max_block) { +error_setg (errp,"broken server sent INFO_ZERO_SIZE with" +" maximum zero %" PRIu32" less than maximum block %" + PRIu32, info->max_zero, info->max_block); +return -1 ; + } + info->max_zero =QEMU_ALIGN_DOWN (info->max_zero, info->min_block); + }trace_nbd_opt_go_success ();return 1 ; }nbd/trace-events +2
-0@@ -6,6 +6,8 @@ nbd_opt_go_start(const char *name) "Attempting NBD_OPT_GO for export '%s'" nbd_opt_go_success(void) "Export is good to go" nbd_opt_go_info_unknown(int info, const char *name) "Ignoring unknown info %d (%s)" nbd_opt_go_info_block_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t preferred, uint32_t maximum) "Block sizes are 0x%" PRIx32 ", 0x%" PRIx32 ", 0x%" PRIx32 +nbd_opt_go_info_trim_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t maximum) "Trim sizes are 0x%" PRIx32 ", 0x%" PRIx32 +nbd_opt_go_info_zero_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t maximum) "Zero sizes are 0x%" PRIx32 ", 0x%" PRIx32 nbd_receive_query_exports_start(const char *wantname) "Querying export list for '%s'" nbd_receive_query_exports_success(const char *wantname) "Found desired export name '%s'" nbd_receive_starttls_new_client(void) "Setting up TLS"
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Vladimir
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] nbd/client: Support requests of additional block sizing info
Quoted 19 lines · Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Quoted 18 lines · Eric Blake
The NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Implement the client side support for these alternate limits, by always requesting the new information (a compliant server must ignore the request if it is unknown), and by validating anything reported by the server before populating the block layer limits.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/nbd/2018/03/msg00048.html
Signed-off-by Eric Blake <[email protected]>+++
b/nbd/client.cnbd/client.c +0
-0@@ -337,16 +337,18 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, constchar *wantname, info->flags = 0;
Quoted 5 lines
nbd/client.c static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname, · line 340
Quoted 3 lines
nbd/client.c +1
-1trace_nbd_opt_go_start(wantname); - buf = g_malloc(4 + len + 2 + 2 * info->request_sizes + 1); + buf = g_malloc(4 + len + 2 + 3 * 2 * info->request_sizes + 1);Hmm, what "+1" means?
Doesn't appear to be necessary, but a little slop never hurts. Better might be struct-ifying things rather than open-coding offsets, or even using a vectored approach rather than requiring a single buffer. But if useful, that's refactoring that is independent of this patch, while this is just demonstrating the bare minimum implementation of the new feature.
Quoted 18 lines
Quoted 16 lines
nbd/client.c +5
-3stl_be_p(buf, len); memcpy(buf + 4, wantname, len); - /* At most one request, everything else up to server */ - stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len, info->request_sizes); + /* Either 0 or 3 requests, everything else up to server */ + stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len, 3 * info->request_sizes); if (info->request_sizes) { stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len + 2, NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE); + stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len + 2 + 2, NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE); + stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len + 2 + 2 + 2, NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE); } error = nbd_send_option_request(ioc, NBD_OPT_GO, - 4 + len + 2 + 2 * info->request_sizes, + 4 + len + 2 + 3 * 2 * info->request_sizes,Quoted 1 line
buf, errp);
Quoted 2 lines
magic chunk) Change looks correct. Is it worth introducing a
buf_lenvariable, to not retype it?
And increment as we go? Yeah, it might make things more legible.
Quoted 12 lines
Quoted 11 lines
+
be32_to_cpus(&info->max_trim);
+ if (!info->min_trim || !info->max_trim ||
+ (info->max_trim!=UINT32_MAX&&
+ !QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(info->max_trim,info->min_trim))) { + error_setg(errp, "server trim sizes %" PRIu32 "/%" PRIu32
+ " are not valid",info->min_trim,info->max_trim);
+nbd_send_opt_abort(ioc);
+ return -1;
+ }
Quoted 1 line
Didn't you forget to check that
min_trimis a power of two?
Nope. The NBD spec wording specifically uses "The minimum trim size SHOULD be a power of 2, and MUST be at least as large as the preferred block size advertised in NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE", in part because there ARE existing hardware iscsi devices that have an advertised preferred/maximum trim size of exactly 15 megabytes (you can request smaller trims 1M at a time, and the device then caches things to eventually report unmapped slices at a 15M boundary). For more information on this odd hardware, look in the qemu logs for the Dell Equallogic device, such as commit 3482b9bc.
Since the NBD 'min trim' is advisory, and merely telling the client the ideal alignments to use for a trim most likely to have an effect (on Equallogic, a 1M trim by itself might not trim anything unless neighboring areas are also trimmed, while an aligned 15M trim is immediately observable), an NBD server wrapping such an iscsi device may prefer to mirror the hardware's preferred alignment of 15M, rather than inventing a minimum alignment of 1M, in what it advertises in NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE.
And maybe I should tweak the NBD spec addition to call things "preferred trim/zero" rather than "min trim/zero", if that makes things any easier to grasp on first read, and better matches the iscsi concept.
Quoted 11 lines
hmm, so, now
nbd_opt_go()is full of very-very similar code parts, which may worth some refactoring now or in future.Are we going to add similar limits for
BLOCK_STATUS? and for CACHE? I have an idea: why not to make an universal option for it in protocol? Something likeoption
INFO_CMD_SIZE:
uint16_tcommand
uint32_tmin_block
uint32_tmax_block
Quoted 4 lines
and server can send several such options. Most of semantics for these additional limits are common, so it will simplify both documentation and realization..
I'll copy this to nbd thread and it is better to discuss it in it.
Yep, I've followed up on that thread, but will post a v2 of this proposal along those lines.
Signature · 3 lines
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] nbd/client: Support requests of additional block sizing info
Quoted 64 lines · Eric Blake
Quoted 19 lines · Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Quoted 18 lines · Eric Blake
The NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Implement the client side support for these alternate limits, by always requesting the new information (a compliant server must ignore the request if it is unknown), and by validating anything reported by the server before populating the block layer limits.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/nbd/2018/03/msg00048.html
Signed-off-by Eric Blake <[email protected]>+++
b/nbd/client.cnbd/client.c +0
-0@@ -337,16 +337,18 @@ static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, constchar *wantname, info->flags = 0;Quoted 5 lines
nbd/client.c static int nbd_opt_go(QIOChannel *ioc, const char *wantname, · line 340
Quoted 3 lines
nbd/client.c +1
-1trace_nbd_opt_go_start(wantname); - buf = g_malloc(4 + len + 2 + 2 * info->request_sizes + 1); + buf = g_malloc(4 + len + 2 + 3 * 2 * info->request_sizes + 1);Hmm, what "+1" means?
Doesn't appear to be necessary, but a little slop never hurts. Better might be struct-ifying things rather than open-coding offsets, or even using a vectored approach rather than requiring a single buffer. But if useful, that's refactoring that is independent of this patch, while this is just demonstrating the bare minimum implementation of the new feature.
Quoted 18 lines
Quoted 16 lines
nbd/client.c +5
-3stl_be_p(buf, len); memcpy(buf + 4, wantname, len); - /* At most one request, everything else up to server */ - stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len, info->request_sizes); + /* Either 0 or 3 requests, everything else up to server */ + stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len, 3 * info->request_sizes); if (info->request_sizes) { stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len + 2, NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE); + stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len + 2 + 2, NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE); + stw_be_p(buf + 4 + len + 2 + 2 + 2, NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE); } error = nbd_send_option_request(ioc, NBD_OPT_GO, - 4 + len + 2 + 2 * info->request_sizes, + 4 + len + 2 + 3 * 2 * info->request_sizes,Quoted 1 line
buf, errp);
Quoted 2 lines
magic chunk) Change looks correct. Is it worth introducing a
buf_lenvariable, to not retype it?And increment as we go? Yeah, it might make things more legible.
Quoted 12 lines
Quoted 11 lines
+
be32_to_cpus(&info->max_trim);
+ if (!info->min_trim || !info->max_trim ||
+ (info->max_trim!=UINT32_MAX&&
+ !QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(info->max_trim,info->min_trim))) { + error_setg(errp, "server trim sizes %" PRIu32 "/%" PRIu32
+ " are not valid",info->min_trim,info->max_trim);
+nbd_send_opt_abort(ioc);
+ return -1;
+ }
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Didn't you forget to check that
min_trimis a power of two?Nope. The NBD spec wording specifically uses "The minimum trim size SHOULD be a power of 2, and MUST be at least as large as the preferred block size advertised in
NBD_INFO_BLOCK_SIZE", in part because there ARE existing hardware iscsi devices that have an advertised preferred/maximum trim size of exactly 15 megabytes (you can request smaller trims 1M at a time, and the device then caches things to eventually report unmapped slices at a 15M boundary). For more information on this odd hardware, look in the qemu logs for the Dell Equallogic device, such as commit3482b9bc.
Ok. Interesting, thank you.
Quoted 4 lines
Since the NBD 'min trim' is advisory, and merely telling the client the ideal alignments to use for a trim most likely to have an effect (on Equallogic, a 1M trim by itself might not trim anything unless neighboring areas are also trimmed, while an aligned 15M trim is immediately observable), an NBD server wrapping such an iscsi device may prefer to mirror the hardware's preferred alignment of 15M, rather than inventing a minimum alignment of 1M, in what it advertises in
NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE.And maybe I should tweak the NBD spec addition to call things "preferred trim/zero" rather than "min trim/zero", if that makes things any easier to grasp on first read, and better matches the iscsi concept.
good idea. and it will better correspond to pref_block for INFO_BLOCK_SIZE, as they are compared with it.
Quoted 19 lines
Quoted 12 lines
hmm, so, now
nbd_opt_go()is full of very-very similar code parts, which may worth some refactoring now or in future.Are we going to add similar limits for
BLOCK_STATUS? and for CACHE? I have an idea: why not to make an universal option for it in protocol? Something likeoption
INFO_CMD_SIZE:
uint16_tcommand
uint32_tmin_block
uint32_tmax_blockQuoted 4 lines
and server can send several such options. Most of semantics for these additional limits are common, so it will simplify both documentation and realization..
I'll copy this to nbd thread and it is better to discuss it in it.
Yep, I've followed up on that thread, but will post a v2 of this proposal along those lines.
Signature · 2 lines
Best regards, Vladimir
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] nbd/client: Support requests of additional block sizing info
In reply to Eric BlakeQuoted 53 lines · Eric Blake
The NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Implement the client side support for these alternate limits, by always requesting the new information (a compliant server must ignore the request if it is unknown), and by validating anything reported by the server before populating the block layer limits.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/nbd/2018/03/msg00048.html
Signed-off-by Eric Blake <[email protected]>---
The given URL for the NBD spec was v3; it will change to be a v4 version of that patch in part to point back to this qemu commit as a proof of implementation.
--- include/block/nbd.h | 4 ++ block/nbd.c | 15 ++++++- nbd/client.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- nbd/trace-events | 2 + 4 files changed, 131 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)include/block/nbd.h +4
-0@@ -270,6 +270,10 @@ struct NBDExportInfo {uint32_t min_block;uint32_t opt_block;uint32_t max_block; +uint32_t min_trim; +uint32_t max_trim; +uint32_t min_zero; +uint32_t max_zero;uint32_t meta_base_allocation_id; };block/nbd.c +4
-2@@ -478,8 +478,19 @@ static void nbd_refresh_limits(BlockDriverState *bs, Error **errp)uint32_t max =MIN_NON_ZERO (NBD_MAX_BUFFER_SIZE , s->info.max_block); bs->bl.request_alignment = min ? min :BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE ; - bs->bl.max_pdiscard = max; - bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes = max; +if (s->info.max_trim) { + bs->bl.max_pdiscard =MIN (s->info.max_trim,BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES ); + }else { + bs->bl.max_pdiscard = max;
block/nbd.c static void nbd_refresh_limits(BlockDriverState *bs, Error **errp) · line 494
Quoted 10 lines
block/nbd.c +9
-0+ } + bs->bl.pdiscard_alignment = s->info.min_trim; +if (s->info.max_zero) { + bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes =MIN (s->info.max_zero, +BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES ); + }else { + bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes = max; + } + bs->bl.pwrite_zeroes_alignment = s->info.min_zero; bs->bl.max_transfer = max;
Should not max_transfer be updated too? Looks like it limits all requests, is it right?
Best regards,
Vladimir
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] nbd/client: Support requests of additional block sizing info
Quoted 8 lines · Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
Quoted 7 lines · Eric Blake
The NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Implement the client side support for these alternate limits, by always requesting the new information (a compliant server must ignore the request if it is unknown), and by validating anything reported by the server before populating the block layer limits.
I still need to do a v2 of this series based on feedback from the NBD list, but answering your question in the meantime:
Quoted 19 lines
Quoted 10 lines
bs->bl.request_alignment= min ? min :BDRV_SECTOR_SIZE; -bs->bl.max_pdiscard= max;
-bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes= max;
+ if (s->info.max_trim) {
+bs->bl.max_pdiscard=MIN(s->info.max_trim, BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES);
+ } else {
+bs->bl.max_pdiscard= max;
+ }
+bs->bl.pdiscard_alignment=s->info.min_trim;Quoted 8 lines
+ if (
s->info.max_zero) {
+bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes= MIN(s->info.max_zero, +BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES); + } else {
+bs->bl.max_pwrite_zeroes= max;
+ }
+bs->bl.pwrite_zeroes_alignment=s->info.min_zero;bs->bl.max_transfer= max;
Quoted 1 line
Should not
max_transferbe updated too? Looks like it limits all requests, is it right?
max_transfer affects read and write requests, but not write_zero requests (where max_pwrite_zeroes is used instead) or trim requests (where max_pdiscard is used instead). Which is precisely the semantics we want - the NBD extension is mirroring the fact that qemu already has a way to track independent limits for trim/zero that can be larger than the normal limits for read/write, because trim/zero do not involve a transfer of a large data buffer.
Signature · 3 lines
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
PATCH 4/4 nbd/server: Support requests of additional block sizing info
In reply to Eric BlakeThe NBD spec is clarifying [1] that a server may want to advertise different limits for READ/WRITE (in our case, 32M) than for TRIM/ZERO (in our case, nearly 4G). Implement the server side support for these alternate limits, by always advertising the new information (a compliant client must ignore a gratuitous advertisement if it is unknown).
[1] https://lists.debian.org/nbd/2018/03/msg00048.html
---
The given URL for the NBD spec was v3; it will change to be a v4 version of that patch in part to point back to this qemu commit as a proof of implementation.
--- nbd/server.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ nbd/trace-events | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
nbd/server.c +30 -0
@@ -617,6 +617,36 @@ static int nbd_negotiate_handle_info(NBDClient *client, uint16_t myflags,return rc; } +/* Send NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE always. */ +/* minimum - Hard-code to 4096 for now, matching preferred block. +* TODO: consult blk_bs(blk)->bl.pdiscard_alignment? */ + sizes[0 ] =4096 ; +/* maximum - < 2G (then block layer fragments to bl.max_pdiscard). */ + sizes[1 ] =QEMU_ALIGN_DOWN (BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES , sizes[0 ]); +trace_nbd_negotiate_handle_info_trim_size (sizes[0 ], sizes[1 ]); +cpu_to_be32s (&sizes[0 ]); +cpu_to_be32s (&sizes[1 ]); + rc =nbd_negotiate_send_info (client,NBD_INFO_TRIM_SIZE , +2 *sizeof (sizes[0 ]), sizes, errp); +if (rc <0 ) { +return rc; + } + +/* Send NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE always. */ +/* minimum - Hard-code to 4096 for now, matching preferred block. +* TODO: consult blk_bs(blk)->bl.pwrite_zeroes_alignment? */ + sizes[0 ] =4096 ; +/* maximum - < 2G (then block layer fragments to bl.max_pwrite_zeroes). */ + sizes[1 ] =QEMU_ALIGN_DOWN (BDRV_REQUEST_MAX_BYTES , sizes[0 ]); +trace_nbd_negotiate_handle_info_zero_size (sizes[0 ], sizes[1 ]); +cpu_to_be32s (&sizes[0 ]); +cpu_to_be32s (&sizes[1 ]); + rc =nbd_negotiate_send_info (client,NBD_INFO_ZERO_SIZE , +2 *sizeof (sizes[0 ]), sizes, errp); +if (rc <0 ) { +return rc; + } +/* Send NBD_INFO_EXPORT always */ trace_nbd_negotiate_new_style_size_flags (exp->size, exp->nbdflags | myflags);
nbd/trace-events +2 -0
@@ -46,6 +46,8 @@ nbd_negotiate_send_info(int info, const char *name, uint32_t length) "Sending NB nbd_negotiate_handle_info_requests(int requests) "Client requested %d items of info" nbd_negotiate_handle_info_request(int request, const char *name) "Client requested info %d (%s)" nbd_negotiate_handle_info_block_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t preferred, uint32_t maximum) "advertising minimum 0x%" PRIx32 ", preferred 0x%" PRIx32 ", maximum 0x%" PRIx32 +nbd_negotiate_handle_info_trim_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t maximum) "advertising minimum 0x%" PRIx32 ", maximum 0x%" PRIx32 +nbd_negotiate_handle_info_zero_size(uint32_t minimum, uint32_t maximum) "advertising minimum 0x%" PRIx32 ", maximum 0x%" PRIx32 nbd_negotiate_handle_starttls(void) "Setting up TLS" nbd_negotiate_handle_starttls_handshake(void) "Starting TLS handshake" nbd_negotiate_meta_context(const char *optname, const char *export, uint32_t queries) "Client requested %s for export %s, with %" PRIu32 " queries"
Signature · 1 line
2.14.3