Re: [linux-lvm] How to implement live migration of VMs in thinlv after using lvmlockd
Zhiyong Ye <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.linux-lvm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
在 11/2/22 1:57 AM, David Teigland 写道: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 01:02:27AM +0800, Zhiyong Ye wrote: >> Hi Dave, >> >> Thank you for your reply! >> >> Does this mean that there is no way to live migrate VMs when using lvmlockd? > > You could by using linear LVs, ovirt does this using sanlock directly, > since lvmlockd arrived later. > Yes, standard LV is theoretically capable of live migration because it supports multiple hosts using the same LV concurrently with a shared lock (lvchange -asy). But I want to support the live migration feature for both LVs (thin LV and standard LV). >> As you describe, the granularity of thinlv's sharing/unsharing is per >> read/write IO, except that lvmlockd reinforces this limitation for the lvm >> activation command. >> >> Is it possible to modify the code of lvmlockd to break this limitation and >> let libvirt/qemu guarantee the mutual exclusivity of each read/write IO >> across hosts when live migration? > > lvmlockd locking does not apply to the dm i/o layers. The kind of > multi-host locking that you seem to be talking about would need to be > implemented inside dm-thin to protect on-disk data structures that it > modifies. In reality you would need to write a new dm target with locking > and data structures designed for that kind of sharing. I can try to write a new dm thin target or make some modifications based on the existing dm-thin target to support this feature, if it is technically feasible. But I'm curious why the current dm-thin doesn't support multi-host shared access, just like dm-linear does. Regards! Zhiyong _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list [email protected] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/