On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 03:31:34PM +0200, Marc Hartmayer wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 01:39 PM +0200, Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > If srv->workers is a NULL pointer, as it is the case if there are no
> > workers, then don't try to dereference it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marc Hartmayer <mhartmay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Boris Fiuczynski <fiuczy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > src/rpc/virnetserver.c | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/rpc/virnetserver.c b/src/rpc/virnetserver.c
> > index 5ae809e372..be6f610880 100644
> > --- a/src/rpc/virnetserver.c
> > +++ b/src/rpc/virnetserver.c
> > @@ -933,13 +933,21 @@ virNetServerGetThreadPoolParameters(virNetServerPtr srv,
> > size_t *jobQueueDepth)
> > {
> > virObjectLock(srv);
> > -
> > - *minWorkers = virThreadPoolGetMinWorkers(srv->workers);
> > - *maxWorkers = virThreadPoolGetMaxWorkers(srv->workers);
> > - *freeWorkers = virThreadPoolGetFreeWorkers(srv->workers);
> > - *nWorkers = virThreadPoolGetCurrentWorkers(srv->workers);
> > - *nPrioWorkers = virThreadPoolGetPriorityWorkers(srv->workers);
> > - *jobQueueDepth = virThreadPoolGetJobQueueDepth(srv->workers);
> > + if (srv->workers) {
> > + *minWorkers = virThreadPoolGetMinWorkers(srv->workers);
> > + *maxWorkers = virThreadPoolGetMaxWorkers(srv->workers);
> > + *freeWorkers = virThreadPoolGetFreeWorkers(srv->workers);
> > + *nWorkers = virThreadPoolGetCurrentWorkers(srv->workers);
> > + *nPrioWorkers = virThreadPoolGetPriorityWorkers(srv->workers);
> > + *jobQueueDepth = virThreadPoolGetJobQueueDepth(srv->workers);
> > + } else {
> > + *minWorkers = 0;
> > + *maxWorkers = 0;
> > + *freeWorkers = 0;
> > + *nWorkers = 0;
> > + *nPrioWorkers = 0;
> > + *jobQueueDepth = 0;
> > + }
> >
> > virObjectUnlock(srv);
> > return 0;
> > --
> > 2.13.6
>
> After thinking again it probably makes more sense (and the code more
> beautiful) to initialize the worker pool even for maxworker=0 (within
I don't understand why should we do that. We don't even initialize it for
libvirtd server - the implications are clear - you don't have workers, you
don't get to process a job.
> virNetServerNew) (=> we'll have to adapt virNetServerDispatchNewMessage
> as well). BTW, there is also a segmentation fault in
> virThreadPoolSetParameters… And currently it’s not possible to start
> with maxworkers set to 0 and then increase it via
Do I assume correctly that virNetServerDispatchNewMessage would allocate a new
worker if there was a request to process but the threadpool was empty? If so, I
don't see a reason to do that, why would anyone want to run with no workers?
They don't consume any resources, since they're waiting on a condition.
However, any segfaults or deadlocks must be fixed, I'll have a look at the
series as is, unless you've got a compelling reason why it's beneficial to run
with no workers at all.
Thanks,
Erik
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
