2 * Block node graph modifications tests
4 * Copyright (c) 2019-2021 Virtuozzo International GmbH. All rights reserved.
6 * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
7 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
8 * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
9 * (at your option) any later version.
11 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
12 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
13 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
14 * GNU General Public License for more details.
16 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
17 * along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
21 #include "qemu/osdep.h"
22 #include "qapi/error.h"
23 #include "qemu/main-loop.h"
24 #include "block/block_int.h"
25 #include "sysemu/block-backend.h"
27 static BlockDriver bdrv_pass_through
= {
28 .format_name
= "pass-through",
30 .filtered_child_is_backing
= true,
31 .bdrv_child_perm
= bdrv_default_perms
,
34 static void no_perm_default_perms(BlockDriverState
*bs
, BdrvChild
*c
,
36 BlockReopenQueue
*reopen_queue
,
37 uint64_t perm
, uint64_t shared
,
38 uint64_t *nperm
, uint64_t *nshared
)
41 *nshared
= BLK_PERM_ALL
;
44 static BlockDriver bdrv_no_perm
= {
45 .format_name
= "no-perm",
46 .supports_backing
= true,
47 .bdrv_child_perm
= no_perm_default_perms
,
50 static void exclusive_write_perms(BlockDriverState
*bs
, BdrvChild
*c
,
52 BlockReopenQueue
*reopen_queue
,
53 uint64_t perm
, uint64_t shared
,
54 uint64_t *nperm
, uint64_t *nshared
)
56 *nperm
= BLK_PERM_WRITE
;
57 *nshared
= BLK_PERM_ALL
& ~BLK_PERM_WRITE
;
60 static BlockDriver bdrv_exclusive_writer
= {
61 .format_name
= "exclusive-writer",
63 .filtered_child_is_backing
= true,
64 .bdrv_child_perm
= exclusive_write_perms
,
67 static BlockDriverState
*no_perm_node(const char *name
)
69 return bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_no_perm
, name
, BDRV_O_RDWR
, &error_abort
);
72 static BlockDriverState
*pass_through_node(const char *name
)
74 return bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_pass_through
, name
,
75 BDRV_O_RDWR
, &error_abort
);
78 static BlockDriverState
*exclusive_writer_node(const char *name
)
80 return bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_exclusive_writer
, name
,
81 BDRV_O_RDWR
, &error_abort
);
85 * test_update_perm_tree
87 * When checking node for a possibility to update permissions, it's subtree
88 * should be correctly checked too. New permissions for each node should be
89 * calculated and checked in context of permissions of other nodes. If we
90 * check new permissions of the node only in context of old permissions of
91 * its neighbors, we can finish up with wrong permission graph.
93 * This test firstly create the following graph:
99 * | shared: except write
101 * +-------------------+ +----------------+
102 * | passtrough filter |---------->| null-co node |
103 * +-------------------+ +----------------+
106 * and then, tries to append filter under node. Expected behavior: fail.
107 * Otherwise we'll get the following picture, with two BdrvChild'ren, having
108 * write permission to one node, without actually sharing it.
114 * | perm: write, read
115 * | shared: except write
117 * +-------------------+
118 * | passtrough filter |
119 * +-------------------+
121 * perm: write, read | | perm: write, read
122 * shared: except write | | shared: except write
128 static void test_update_perm_tree(void)
132 BlockBackend
*root
= blk_new(qemu_get_aio_context(),
133 BLK_PERM_WRITE
| BLK_PERM_CONSISTENT_READ
,
134 BLK_PERM_ALL
& ~BLK_PERM_WRITE
);
135 BlockDriverState
*bs
= no_perm_node("node");
136 BlockDriverState
*filter
= pass_through_node("filter");
138 blk_insert_bs(root
, bs
, &error_abort
);
140 bdrv_attach_child(filter
, bs
, "child", &child_of_bds
,
141 BDRV_CHILD_DATA
, &error_abort
);
143 ret
= bdrv_append(filter
, bs
, NULL
);
144 g_assert_cmpint(ret
, <, 0);
151 * test_should_update_child
153 * Test that bdrv_replace_node, and concretely should_update_child
154 * do the right thing, i.e. not creating loops on the graph.
156 * The test does the following:
159 * +------+ +--------+
160 * | root | | filter |
161 * +------+ +--------+
165 * +------+ +--------+
166 * | node |<---------| target |
167 * +------+ backing +--------+
169 * 2. Append @filter above @node. If should_update_child works correctly,
170 * it understands, that backing child of @target should not be updated,
171 * as it will create a loop on node graph. Resulting picture should
172 * be the left one, not the right:
180 * +--------+ target +--------+ target
181 * | filter |--------------+ | filter |--------------+
182 * +--------+ | +--------+ |
184 * backing| | backing| | +--------+
185 * v v | +-----------| target |
186 * +------+ +--------+ v backing +--------+
187 * | node |<---------| target | +------+
188 * +------+ backing +--------+ | node |
191 * (good picture) (bad picture)
194 static void test_should_update_child(void)
196 BlockBackend
*root
= blk_new(qemu_get_aio_context(), 0, BLK_PERM_ALL
);
197 BlockDriverState
*bs
= no_perm_node("node");
198 BlockDriverState
*filter
= no_perm_node("filter");
199 BlockDriverState
*target
= no_perm_node("target");
201 blk_insert_bs(root
, bs
, &error_abort
);
203 bdrv_set_backing_hd(target
, bs
, &error_abort
);
205 g_assert(target
->backing
->bs
== bs
);
206 bdrv_attach_child(filter
, target
, "target", &child_of_bds
,
207 BDRV_CHILD_DATA
, &error_abort
);
208 bdrv_append(filter
, bs
, &error_abort
);
209 g_assert(target
->backing
->bs
== bs
);
217 * test_parallel_exclusive_write
219 * Check that when we replace node, old permissions of the node being removed
220 * doesn't break the replacement.
222 static void test_parallel_exclusive_write(void)
224 BlockDriverState
*top
= exclusive_writer_node("top");
225 BlockDriverState
*base
= no_perm_node("base");
226 BlockDriverState
*fl1
= pass_through_node("fl1");
227 BlockDriverState
*fl2
= pass_through_node("fl2");
230 * bdrv_attach_child() eats child bs reference, so we need two @base
231 * references for two filters:
235 bdrv_attach_child(top
, fl1
, "backing", &child_of_bds
,
236 BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED
| BDRV_CHILD_PRIMARY
,
238 bdrv_attach_child(fl1
, base
, "backing", &child_of_bds
,
239 BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED
| BDRV_CHILD_PRIMARY
,
241 bdrv_attach_child(fl2
, base
, "backing", &child_of_bds
,
242 BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED
| BDRV_CHILD_PRIMARY
,
245 bdrv_replace_node(fl1
, fl2
, &error_abort
);
252 * write-to-selected node may have several DATA children, one of them may be
253 * "selected". Exclusive write permission is taken on selected child.
255 * We don't realize write handler itself, as we need only to test how permission
258 typedef struct BDRVWriteToSelectedState
{
260 } BDRVWriteToSelectedState
;
262 static void write_to_selected_perms(BlockDriverState
*bs
, BdrvChild
*c
,
264 BlockReopenQueue
*reopen_queue
,
265 uint64_t perm
, uint64_t shared
,
266 uint64_t *nperm
, uint64_t *nshared
)
268 BDRVWriteToSelectedState
*s
= bs
->opaque
;
270 if (s
->selected
&& c
== s
->selected
) {
271 *nperm
= BLK_PERM_WRITE
;
272 *nshared
= BLK_PERM_ALL
& ~BLK_PERM_WRITE
;
275 *nshared
= BLK_PERM_ALL
;
279 static BlockDriver bdrv_write_to_selected
= {
280 .format_name
= "write-to-selected",
281 .instance_size
= sizeof(BDRVWriteToSelectedState
),
282 .bdrv_child_perm
= write_to_selected_perms
,
287 * The following test shows that topological-sort order is required for
288 * permission update, simple DFS is not enough.
290 * Consider the block driver (write-to-selected) which has two children: one is
291 * selected so we have exclusive write access to it and for the other one we
292 * don't need any specific permissions.
294 * And, these two children has a common base child, like this:
295 * (additional "top" on top is used in test just because the only public
296 * function to update permission should get a specific child to update.
297 * Making bdrv_refresh_perms() public just for this test isn't worth it)
299 * ┌─────┐ ┌───────────────────┐ ┌─────┐
300 * │ fl2 │ ◀── │ write-to-selected │ ◀── │ top │
301 * └─────┘ └───────────────────┘ └─────┘
315 * So, exclusive write is propagated.
317 * Assume, we want to select fl2 instead of fl1.
318 * So, we set some option for write-to-selected driver and do permission update.
320 * With simple DFS, if permission update goes first through
321 * write-to-selected -> fl1 -> base branch it will succeed: it firstly drop
322 * exclusive write permissions and than apply them for another BdrvChildren.
323 * But if permission update goes first through write-to-selected -> fl2 -> base
324 * branch it will fail, as when we try to update fl2->base child, old not yet
325 * updated fl1->base child will be in conflict.
327 * With topological-sort order we always update parents before children, so fl1
328 * and fl2 are both updated when we update base and there is no conflict.
330 static void test_parallel_perm_update(void)
332 BlockDriverState
*top
= no_perm_node("top");
333 BlockDriverState
*ws
=
334 bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_write_to_selected
, "ws", BDRV_O_RDWR
,
336 BDRVWriteToSelectedState
*s
= ws
->opaque
;
337 BlockDriverState
*base
= no_perm_node("base");
338 BlockDriverState
*fl1
= pass_through_node("fl1");
339 BlockDriverState
*fl2
= pass_through_node("fl2");
340 BdrvChild
*c_fl1
, *c_fl2
;
343 * bdrv_attach_child() eats child bs reference, so we need two @base
344 * references for two filters:
348 bdrv_attach_child(top
, ws
, "file", &child_of_bds
, BDRV_CHILD_DATA
,
350 c_fl1
= bdrv_attach_child(ws
, fl1
, "first", &child_of_bds
,
351 BDRV_CHILD_DATA
, &error_abort
);
352 c_fl2
= bdrv_attach_child(ws
, fl2
, "second", &child_of_bds
,
353 BDRV_CHILD_DATA
, &error_abort
);
354 bdrv_attach_child(fl1
, base
, "backing", &child_of_bds
,
355 BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED
| BDRV_CHILD_PRIMARY
,
357 bdrv_attach_child(fl2
, base
, "backing", &child_of_bds
,
358 BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED
| BDRV_CHILD_PRIMARY
,
361 /* Select fl1 as first child to be active */
363 bdrv_child_refresh_perms(top
, top
->children
.lh_first
, &error_abort
);
365 assert(c_fl1
->perm
& BLK_PERM_WRITE
);
366 assert(!(c_fl2
->perm
& BLK_PERM_WRITE
));
368 /* Now, try to switch active child and update permissions */
370 bdrv_child_refresh_perms(top
, top
->children
.lh_first
, &error_abort
);
372 assert(c_fl2
->perm
& BLK_PERM_WRITE
);
373 assert(!(c_fl1
->perm
& BLK_PERM_WRITE
));
375 /* Switch once more, to not care about real child order in the list */
377 bdrv_child_refresh_perms(top
, top
->children
.lh_first
, &error_abort
);
379 assert(c_fl1
->perm
& BLK_PERM_WRITE
);
380 assert(!(c_fl2
->perm
& BLK_PERM_WRITE
));
386 * It's possible that filter required permissions allows to insert it to backing
389 * 1. [top] -> [filter] -> [base]
391 * but doesn't allow to add it as a branch:
397 * So, inserting such filter should do all graph modifications and only then
398 * update permissions. If we try to go through intermediate state [2] and update
399 * permissions on it we'll fail.
401 * Let's check that bdrv_append() can append such a filter.
403 static void test_append_greedy_filter(void)
405 BlockDriverState
*top
= exclusive_writer_node("top");
406 BlockDriverState
*base
= no_perm_node("base");
407 BlockDriverState
*fl
= exclusive_writer_node("fl1");
409 bdrv_attach_child(top
, base
, "backing", &child_of_bds
,
410 BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED
| BDRV_CHILD_PRIMARY
,
413 bdrv_append(fl
, base
, &error_abort
);
418 int main(int argc
, char *argv
[])
421 qemu_init_main_loop(&error_abort
);
423 g_test_init(&argc
, &argv
, NULL
);
425 g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/update-perm-tree", test_update_perm_tree
);
426 g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/should-update-child",
427 test_should_update_child
);
428 g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/parallel-perm-update",
429 test_parallel_perm_update
);
430 g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/parallel-exclusive-write",
431 test_parallel_exclusive_write
);
432 g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/append-greedy-filter",
433 test_append_greedy_filter
);