diff --git a/tests/unit/test-bdrv-graph-mod.c b/tests/unit/test-bdrv-graph-mod.c index 80a9a20066..a8219b131e 100644 --- a/tests/unit/test-bdrv-graph-mod.c +++ b/tests/unit/test-bdrv-graph-mod.c @@ -238,6 +238,120 @@ static void test_parallel_exclusive_write(void) bdrv_unref(top); } +static void write_to_file_perms(BlockDriverState *bs, BdrvChild *c, + BdrvChildRole role, + BlockReopenQueue *reopen_queue, + uint64_t perm, uint64_t shared, + uint64_t *nperm, uint64_t *nshared) +{ + if (bs->file && c == bs->file) { + *nperm = BLK_PERM_WRITE; + *nshared = BLK_PERM_ALL & ~BLK_PERM_WRITE; + } else { + *nperm = 0; + *nshared = BLK_PERM_ALL; + } +} + +static BlockDriver bdrv_write_to_file = { + .format_name = "tricky-perm", + .bdrv_child_perm = write_to_file_perms, +}; + + +/* + * The following test shows that topological-sort order is required for + * permission update, simple DFS is not enough. + * + * Consider the block driver which has two filter children: one active + * with exclusive write access and one inactive with no specific + * permissions. + * + * And, these two children has a common base child, like this: + * + * ┌─────┐ ┌──────┐ + * │ fl2 │ ◀── │ top │ + * └─────┘ └──────┘ + * │ │ + * │ │ w + * │ ▼ + * │ ┌──────┐ + * │ │ fl1 │ + * │ └──────┘ + * │ │ + * │ │ w + * │ ▼ + * │ ┌──────┐ + * └───────▶ │ base │ + * └──────┘ + * + * So, exclusive write is propagated. + * + * Assume, we want to make fl2 active instead of fl1. + * So, we set some option for top driver and do permission update. + * + * With simple DFS, if permission update goes first through + * top->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 top->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 *tricky = + bdrv_new_open_driver(&bdrv_write_to_file, "tricky", BDRV_O_RDWR, + &error_abort); + 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, tricky, "file", &child_of_bds, BDRV_CHILD_DATA, + &error_abort); + c_fl1 = bdrv_attach_child(tricky, fl1, "first", &child_of_bds, + BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED, &error_abort); + c_fl2 = bdrv_attach_child(tricky, fl2, "second", &child_of_bds, + BDRV_CHILD_FILTERED, &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 */ + tricky->file = 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 */ + tricky->file = 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 */ + tricky->file = 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); +} + int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { int i; @@ -262,6 +376,8 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) if (debug) { g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/parallel-exclusive-write", test_parallel_exclusive_write); + g_test_add_func("/bdrv-graph-mod/parallel-perm-update", + test_parallel_perm_update); } return g_test_run();