>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> I encounter a problem that after deleting snapshot, the qcow2 image
>>>>>>>> size is very larger than that it should be displayed by ls command,
>>>>>>>> but the virtual disk size is okay via qemu-img info.
>>>>>>>> I suspect that during updating l1 table offset, other I/O job
>>>>>>>> reference the big-endian l1 table offset (very large value),
>>>>>>>> so the file is truncated to very large.
>>>>>>> Not quite. Rather, all the data that the snapshot used to occupy is
>>>>>>> still consuming holes in the file; the maximum offset of the file is
>>>>>>> still unchanged, even if the file is no longer using as many referenced
>>>>>>> clusters. Recent changes have gone in to sparsify the file when
>>>>>>> possible (punching holes if your kernel and file system is new enough to
>>>>>>> support that), so that it is not consuming the amount of disk space that
>>>>>>> a mere ls reports. But if what you are asking for is a way to compact
>>>>>>> the file back down, then you'll need to submit a patch. The idea of
>>>>>>> having an online defragmenter for qcow2 files has been kicked around
>>>>>>> before, but it is complex enough that no one has attempted a patch yet.
>>>>>> Sorry, I didn't clarify the problem clearly.
>>>>>> In qcow2_update_snapshot_refcount(), below code,
>>>>>> /* Update L1 only if it isn't deleted anyway (addend = -1) */
>>>>>> if (ret == 0 && addend >= 0 && l1_modified) {
>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < l1_size; i++) {
>>>>>> cpu_to_be64s(&l1_table[i]);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ret = bdrv_pwrite_sync(bs->file, l1_table_offset, l1_table,
>>>>>> l1_size2);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < l1_size; i++) {
>>>>>> be64_to_cpus(&l1_table[i]);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> between cpu_to_be64s(&l1_table[i]); and be64_to_cpus(&l1_table[i]);,
>>>>>> is it possible that there is other I/O reference this interim l1 table
>>>>>> whose entries contain the be64 l2 table offset?
>>>>>> The be64 l2 table offset maybe a very large value, hundreds of TB is
>>>>>> possible,
>>>>>> then the qcow2 file will be truncated to far larger than normal size.
>>>>>> So we'll see the huge size of the qcow2 file by ls -hl, but the size is
>>>>>> still normal displayed by qemu-img info.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the possibility mentioned above exists, below raw code may fix it,
>>>>>> if (ret == 0 && addend >= 0 && l1_modified) {
>>>>>> tmp_l1_table = g_malloc0(l1_size * sizeof(uint64_t))
>>>>>> memcpy(tmp_l1_table, l1_table, l1_size * sizeof(uint64_t));
>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < l1_size; i++) {
>>>>>> cpu_to_be64s(&tmp_l1_table[i]);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> ret = bdrv_pwrite_sync(bs->file, l1_table_offset,
>>>>>> tmp_l1_table, l1_size2);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> free(tmp_l1_table);
>>>>>> }
>>>>> l1_table is already a local variable (local to
>>>>> qcow2_update_snapshot_refcount()), so I can't really imagine how
>>>>> introducing another local buffer should mitigate the problem, if there
>>>>> is any.
>>>>>
>>>> l1_table is not necessarily a local variable to
>>>> qcow2_update_snapshot_refcount,
>>>> which depends on condition of "if (l1_table_offset != s->l1_table_offset)",
>>>> if the condition not true, l1_table = s->l1_table.
>>> Oh, yes, you're right. Okay, so in theory nothing should happen anyway,
>>> because qcow2 does not have to be reentrant (so s->l1_table will not be
>>> accessed while it's big endian and therefore possibly not in CPU order).
>> Could you detail how qcow2 does not have to be reentrant?
>> In below stack,
>> qcow2_update_snapshot_refcount
>> |- cpu_to_be64s(&l1_table[i])
>> |- bdrv_pwrite_sync
>
>This is executed on bs->file, not the qcow2 BDS.
>
Yes, bs->file is passed to bdrv_pwrite_sync here,
but aio_poll(aio_context) will poll all BDS's aio, not only that of bs->file,
doesn't it?
Is it possible that there are pending aio which belong to this qcow2 BDS still
exist?
Thanks,
Zhang Haoyu
>Max
>
>> |-- bdrv_pwrite
>> |--- bdrv_pwritev
>> |---- bdrv_prwv_co
>> |----- aio_poll(aio_context) <== this aio_context is qemu_aio_context
>> |------ aio_dispatch
>> |------- bdrv_co_io_em_complete
>> |-------- qemu_coroutine_enter(co->coroutine, NULL); <== coroutine entry is
>> bdrv_co_do_rw
>> bdrv_co_do_rw will access l1_table to perform I/O operation.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Zhang Haoyu
>>> But I find it rather ugly to convert the cached L1 table to big endian,
>>> so I'd be fine with the patch you proposed.
>>>
>>> Max
