From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB716293E for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:57:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D8FC3188B8 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:57:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id B6A6A188A9 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:57:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 854D645F5B for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:57:04 +0100 (CET) To: Wolfgang Bumiller Cc: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20201022121118.5504-1-s.reiter@proxmox.com> <20201022121118.5504-2-s.reiter@proxmox.com> <20201027141622.xom5xghfujman3fb@olga.proxmox.com> From: Stefan Reiter Message-ID: <852869e0-e1fc-de3f-439f-881954630b52@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:57:03 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201027141622.xom5xghfujman3fb@olga.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.054 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -2.167 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH qemu 1/2] PVE: Don't expect complete_cb to be called outside coroutine X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 14:57:36 -0000 On 10/27/20 3:16 PM, Wolfgang Bumiller wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 02:11:17PM +0200, Stefan Reiter wrote: >> We're at the mercy of the rest of QEMU here, and it sometimes decides to >> call pvebackup_complete_cb from a coroutine. This really doesn't matter >> to us, so don't assert and crash on it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Reiter >> --- >> pve-backup.c | 7 +++---- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/pve-backup.c b/pve-backup.c >> index 53cf23ed5a..9179754dcb 100644 >> --- a/pve-backup.c >> +++ b/pve-backup.c >> @@ -318,19 +318,18 @@ static void coroutine_fn pvebackup_co_complete_stream(void *opaque) >> >> static void pvebackup_complete_cb(void *opaque, int ret) >> { >> - assert(!qemu_in_coroutine()); >> - >> PVEBackupDevInfo *di = opaque; >> di->completed_ret = ret; >> >> /* >> * Schedule stream cleanup in async coroutine. close_image and finish might >> - * take a while, so we can't block on them here. >> + * take a while, so we can't block on them here. This way it also doesn't >> + * matter if we're already running in a coroutine or not. >> * Note: di is a pointer to an entry in the global backup_state struct, so >> * it stays valid. >> */ >> Coroutine *co = qemu_coroutine_create(pvebackup_co_complete_stream, di); >> - aio_co_schedule(qemu_get_aio_context(), co); >> + aio_co_enter(qemu_get_aio_context(), co); > > Shouldn't this be decided based on `qemu_in_coroutine()`? Or are we > allowed to call enter regardless, I forgot...? > We are allowed to call whenever, if we're in a coroutine in the same context this becomes a call, if not it's scheduled correctly. >> } >> >> static void coroutine_fn pvebackup_co_cancel(void *opaque) >> -- >> 2.20.1