/* * Block node graph modifications tests * * Copyright (c) 2019-2021 Virtuozzo International GmbH. All rights reserved. * * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or * (at your option) any later version. * * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the * GNU General Public License for more details. * * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License * along with this program. If not, see . * */ #include "qemu/osdep.h" #include "qapi/error.h" #include "qemu/main-loop.h" #include "block/block_int.h" #include "sysemu/block-backend.h" static BlockDriver bdrv_pass_through = { .format_name = "pass-through", .bdrv_child_perm = bdrv_default_perms, }; static void no_perm_default_perms(BlockDriverState *bs, BdrvChild *c, BdrvChildRole role, BlockReopenQueue *reopen_queue, uint64_t perm, uint64_t shared, uint64_t *nperm, uint64_t *nshared) { *nperm = 0; *nshared = BLK_PERM_ALL; } static BlockDriver bdrv_no_perm = { .format_name = "no-perm", .supports_backing = true, .bdrv_child_perm = no_perm_default_perms, }; static void exclusive_write_perms(BlockDriverState *bs, BdrvChild *c, BdrvChildRole role, BlockReopenQueue *reopen_queue, uint64_t perm, uint64_t shared, uint64_t *nperm, uint64_t *nshared) { *nperm = BLK_PERM_WRITE; *nshared = BLK_PERM_ALL & ~BLK_PERM_WRITE; } static BlockDriver bdrv_exclusive_writer = { .format_name = "exclusive-writer", .bdrv_child_perm = exclusive_write_perms, }; static BlockDriverState *no_perm_node(const char *name) { return bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_no_perm, name, BDRV_O_RDWR, &error_abort); } static BlockDriverState *pass_through_node(const char *name) { return bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_pass_through, name, BDRV_O_RDWR, &error_abort); } static BlockDriverState *exclusive_writer_node(const char *name) { return bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_exclusive_writer, name, BDRV_O_RDWR, &error_abort); } /* * test_update_perm_tree * * When checking node for a possibility to update permissions, it's subtree * should be correctly checked too. New permissions for each node should be * calculated and checked in context of permissions of other nodes. If we * check new permissions of the node only in context of old permissions of * its neighbors, we can finish up with wrong permission graph. * * This test firstly create the following graph: * +--------+ * | root | * +--------+ * | * | perm: write, read * | shared: except write * v * +-------------------+ +----------------+ * | passtrough filter |---------->| null-co node | * +-------------------+ +----------------+ * * * and then, tries to append filter under node. Expected behavior: fail. * Otherwise we'll get the following picture, with two BdrvChild'ren, having * write permission to one node, without actually sharing it. * * +--------+ * | root | * +--------+ * | * | perm: write, read * | shared: except write * v * +-------------------+ * | passtrough filter | * +-------------------+ * | | * perm: write, read | | perm: write, read * shared: except write | | shared: except write * v v * +----------------+ * | null co node | * +----------------+ */ static void test_update_perm_tree(void) { int ret; BlockBackend *root = blk_new(qemu_get_aio_context(), BLK_PERM_WRITE | BLK_PERM_CONSISTENT_READ, BLK_PERM_ALL & ~BLK_PERM_WRITE); BlockDriverState *bs = no_perm_node("node"); BlockDriverState *filter = pass_through_node("filter"); blk_insert_bs(root, bs, &error_abort); bdrv_attach_child(filter, bs, "child", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED | BDRV_CHILD_PRIMARY, &error_abort); ret = bdrv_append(filter, bs, NULL); g_assert_cmpint(ret, <, 0); bdrv_unref(filter); blk_unref(root); } /* * test_should_update_child * * Test that bdrv_replace_node, and concretely should_update_child * do the right thing, i.e. not creating loops on the graph. * * The test does the following: * 1. initial graph: * * +------+ +--------+ * | root | | filter | * +------+ +--------+ * | | * root| target| * v v * +------+ +--------+ * | node |<---------| target | * +------+ backing +--------+ * * 2. Append @filter above @node. If should_update_child works correctly, * it understands, that backing child of @target should not be updated, * as it will create a loop on node graph. Resulting picture should * be the left one, not the right: * * +------+ +------+ * | root | | root | * +------+ +------+ * | | * root| root| * v v * +--------+ target +--------+ target * | filter |--------------+ | filter |--------------+ * +--------+ | +--------+ | * | | | ^ v * backing| | backing| | +--------+ * v v | +-----------| target | * +------+ +--------+ v backing +--------+ * | node |<---------| target | +------+ * +------+ backing +--------+ | node | * +------+ * * (good picture) (bad picture) * */ static void test_should_update_child(void) { BlockBackend *root = blk_new(qemu_get_aio_context(), 0, BLK_PERM_ALL); BlockDriverState *bs = no_perm_node("node"); BlockDriverState *filter = no_perm_node("filter"); BlockDriverState *target = no_perm_node("target"); blk_insert_bs(root, bs, &error_abort); bdrv_set_backing_hd(target, bs, &error_abort); g_assert(target->backing->bs == bs); bdrv_attach_child(filter, target, "target", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_DATA, &error_abort); bdrv_append(filter, bs, &error_abort); g_assert(target->backing->bs == bs); bdrv_unref(filter); bdrv_unref(bs); blk_unref(root); } /* * test_parallel_exclusive_write * * Check that when we replace node, old permissions of the node being removed * doesn't break the replacement. */ static void test_parallel_exclusive_write(void) { BlockDriverState *top = exclusive_writer_node("top"); BlockDriverState *base = no_perm_node("base"); BlockDriverState *fl1 = pass_through_node("fl1"); BlockDriverState *fl2 = pass_through_node("fl2"); /* * bdrv_attach_child() eats child bs reference, so we need two @base * references for two filters: */ bdrv_ref(base); bdrv_attach_child(top, fl1, "backing", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_DATA, &error_abort); bdrv_attach_child(fl1, base, "backing", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED, &error_abort); bdrv_attach_child(fl2, base, "backing", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED, &error_abort); bdrv_replace_node(fl1, fl2, &error_abort); bdrv_unref(fl2); bdrv_unref(top); } /* * write-to-selected node may have several DATA children, one of them may be * "selected". Exclusive write permission is taken on selected child. * * We don't realize write handler itself, as we need only to test how permission * update works. */ typedef struct BDRVWriteToSelectedState { BdrvChild *selected; } BDRVWriteToSelectedState; static void write_to_selected_perms(BlockDriverState *bs, BdrvChild *c, BdrvChildRole role, BlockReopenQueue *reopen_queue, uint64_t perm, uint64_t shared, uint64_t *nperm, uint64_t *nshared) { BDRVWriteToSelectedState *s = bs->opaque; if (s->selected && c == s->selected) { *nperm = BLK_PERM_WRITE; *nshared = BLK_PERM_ALL & ~BLK_PERM_WRITE; } else { *nperm = 0; *nshared = BLK_PERM_ALL; } } static BlockDriver bdrv_write_to_selected = { .format_name = "write-to-selected", .instance_size = sizeof(BDRVWriteToSelectedState), .bdrv_child_perm = write_to_selected_perms, }; /* * The following test shows that topological-sort order is required for * permission update, simple DFS is not enough. * * Consider the block driver (write-to-selected) which has two children: one is * selected so we have exclusive write access to it and for the other one we * don't need any specific permissions. * * And, these two children has a common base child, like this: * (additional "top" on top is used in test just because the only public * function to update permission should get a specific child to update. * Making bdrv_refresh_perms() public just for this test isn't worth it) * * ┌─────┐ ┌───────────────────┐ ┌─────┐ * │ fl2 │ ◀── │ write-to-selected │ ◀── │ top │ * └─────┘ └───────────────────┘ └─────┘ * │ │ * │ │ w * │ ▼ * │ ┌──────┐ * │ │ fl1 │ * │ └──────┘ * │ │ * │ │ w * │ ▼ * │ ┌──────┐ * └───────▶ │ base │ * └──────┘ * * So, exclusive write is propagated. * * Assume, we want to select fl2 instead of fl1. * So, we set some option for write-to-selected driver and do permission update. * * With simple DFS, if permission update goes first through * write-to-selected -> fl1 -> base branch it will succeed: it firstly drop * exclusive write permissions and than apply them for another BdrvChildren. * But if permission update goes first through write-to-selected -> fl2 -> base * branch it will fail, as when we try to update fl2->base child, old not yet * updated fl1->base child will be in conflict. * * With topological-sort order we always update parents before children, so fl1 * and fl2 are both updated when we update base and there is no conflict. */ static void test_parallel_perm_update(void) { BlockDriverState *top = no_perm_node("top"); BlockDriverState *ws = bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_write_to_selected, "ws", BDRV_O_RDWR, &error_abort); BDRVWriteToSelectedState *s = ws->opaque; BlockDriverState *base = no_perm_node("base"); BlockDriverState *fl1 = pass_through_node("fl1"); BlockDriverState *fl2 = pass_through_node("fl2"); BdrvChild *c_fl1, *c_fl2; /* * bdrv_attach_child() eats child bs reference, so we need two @base * references for two filters: */ bdrv_ref(base); bdrv_attach_child(top, ws, "file", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_DATA, &error_abort); c_fl1 = bdrv_attach_child(ws, fl1, "first", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_DATA, &error_abort); c_fl2 = bdrv_attach_child(ws, fl2, "second", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_DATA, &error_abort); bdrv_attach_child(fl1, base, "backing", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED, &error_abort); bdrv_attach_child(fl2, base, "backing", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED, &error_abort); /* Select fl1 as first child to be active */ s->selected = c_fl1; bdrv_child_refresh_perms(top, top->children.lh_first, &error_abort); assert(c_fl1->perm & BLK_PERM_WRITE); assert(!(c_fl2->perm & BLK_PERM_WRITE)); /* Now, try to switch active child and update permissions */ s->selected = c_fl2; bdrv_child_refresh_perms(top, top->children.lh_first, &error_abort); assert(c_fl2->perm & BLK_PERM_WRITE); assert(!(c_fl1->perm & BLK_PERM_WRITE)); /* Switch once more, to not care about real child order in the list */ s->selected = c_fl1; bdrv_child_refresh_perms(top, top->children.lh_first, &error_abort); assert(c_fl1->perm & BLK_PERM_WRITE); assert(!(c_fl2->perm & BLK_PERM_WRITE)); bdrv_unref(top); } /* * It's possible that filter required permissions allows to insert it to backing * chain, like: * * 1. [top] -> [filter] -> [base] * * but doesn't allow to add it as a branch: * * 2. [filter] --\ * v * [top] -> [base] * * So, inserting such filter should do all graph modifications and only then * update permissions. If we try to go through intermediate state [2] and update * permissions on it we'll fail. * * Let's check that bdrv_append() can append such a filter. */ static void test_append_greedy_filter(void) { BlockDriverState *top = exclusive_writer_node("top"); BlockDriverState *base = no_perm_node("base"); BlockDriverState *fl = exclusive_writer_node("fl1"); bdrv_attach_child(top, base, "backing", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_COW, &error_abort); bdrv_append(fl, base, &error_abort); bdrv_unref(fl); bdrv_unref(top); } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { bdrv_init(); qemu_init_main_loop(&error_abort); g_test_init(&argc, &argv, NULL); g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/update-perm-tree", test_update_perm_tree); g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/should-update-child", test_should_update_child); g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/parallel-perm-update", test_parallel_perm_update); g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/parallel-exclusive-write", test_parallel_exclusive_write); g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/append-greedy-filter", test_append_greedy_filter); return g_test_run(); }