| (RDMA: Remote Direct Memory Access) | 
 | RDMA Live Migration Specification, Version # 1 | 
 | ============================================== | 
 | Wiki: https://wiki.qemu.org/Features/RDMALiveMigration | 
 | Github: git@github.com:hinesmr/qemu.git, 'rdma' branch | 
 |  | 
 | Copyright (C) 2013 Michael R. Hines <mrhines@us.ibm.com> | 
 |  | 
 | An *exhaustive* paper (2010) shows additional performance details | 
 | linked on the QEMU wiki above. | 
 |  | 
 | Contents: | 
 | ========= | 
 | * Introduction | 
 | * Before running | 
 | * Running | 
 | * Performance | 
 | * RDMA Migration Protocol Description | 
 | * Versioning and Capabilities | 
 | * QEMUFileRDMA Interface | 
 | * Migration of VM's ram | 
 | * Error handling | 
 | * TODO | 
 |  | 
 | Introduction: | 
 | ============= | 
 |  | 
 | RDMA helps make your migration more deterministic under heavy load because | 
 | of the significantly lower latency and higher throughput over TCP/IP. This is | 
 | because the RDMA I/O architecture reduces the number of interrupts and | 
 | data copies by bypassing the host networking stack. In particular, a TCP-based | 
 | migration, under certain types of memory-bound workloads, may take a more | 
 | unpredictable amount of time to complete the migration if the amount of | 
 | memory tracked during each live migration iteration round cannot keep pace | 
 | with the rate of dirty memory produced by the workload. | 
 |  | 
 | RDMA currently comes in two flavors: both Ethernet based (RoCE, or RDMA | 
 | over Converged Ethernet) as well as Infiniband-based. This implementation of | 
 | migration using RDMA is capable of using both technologies because of | 
 | the use of the OpenFabrics OFED software stack that abstracts out the | 
 | programming model irrespective of the underlying hardware. | 
 |  | 
 | Refer to openfabrics.org or your respective RDMA hardware vendor for | 
 | an understanding on how to verify that you have the OFED software stack | 
 | installed in your environment. You should be able to successfully link | 
 | against the "librdmacm" and "libibverbs" libraries and development headers | 
 | for a working build of QEMU to run successfully using RDMA Migration. | 
 |  | 
 | BEFORE RUNNING: | 
 | =============== | 
 |  | 
 | Use of RDMA during migration requires pinning and registering memory | 
 | with the hardware. This means that memory must be physically resident | 
 | before the hardware can transmit that memory to another machine. | 
 | If this is not acceptable for your application or product, then the use | 
 | of RDMA migration may in fact be harmful to co-located VMs or other | 
 | software on the machine if there is not sufficient memory available to | 
 | relocate the entire footprint of the virtual machine. If so, then the | 
 | use of RDMA is discouraged and it is recommended to use standard TCP migration. | 
 |  | 
 | Experimental: Next, decide if you want dynamic page registration. | 
 | For example, if you have an 8GB RAM virtual machine, but only 1GB | 
 | is in active use, then enabling this feature will cause all 8GB to | 
 | be pinned and resident in memory. This feature mostly affects the | 
 | bulk-phase round of the migration and can be enabled for extremely | 
 | high-performance RDMA hardware using the following command: | 
 |  | 
 | QEMU Monitor Command: | 
 | $ migrate_set_capability rdma-pin-all on # disabled by default | 
 |  | 
 | Performing this action will cause all 8GB to be pinned, so if that's | 
 | not what you want, then please ignore this step altogether. | 
 |  | 
 | On the other hand, this will also significantly speed up the bulk round | 
 | of the migration, which can greatly reduce the "total" time of your migration. | 
 | Example performance of this using an idle VM in the previous example | 
 | can be found in the "Performance" section. | 
 |  | 
 | Note: for very large virtual machines (hundreds of GBs), pinning all | 
 | *all* of the memory of your virtual machine in the kernel is very expensive | 
 | may extend the initial bulk iteration time by many seconds, | 
 | and thus extending the total migration time. However, this will not | 
 | affect the determinism or predictability of your migration you will | 
 | still gain from the benefits of advanced pinning with RDMA. | 
 |  | 
 | RUNNING: | 
 | ======== | 
 |  | 
 | First, set the migration speed to match your hardware's capabilities: | 
 |  | 
 | QEMU Monitor Command: | 
 | $ migrate_set_parameter max-bandwidth 40g # or whatever is the MAX of your RDMA device | 
 |  | 
 | Next, on the destination machine, add the following to the QEMU command line: | 
 |  | 
 | qemu ..... -incoming rdma:host:port | 
 |  | 
 | Finally, perform the actual migration on the source machine: | 
 |  | 
 | QEMU Monitor Command: | 
 | $ migrate -d rdma:host:port | 
 |  | 
 | PERFORMANCE | 
 | =========== | 
 |  | 
 | Here is a brief summary of total migration time and downtime using RDMA: | 
 | Using a 40gbps infiniband link performing a worst-case stress test, | 
 | using an 8GB RAM virtual machine: | 
 |  | 
 | Using the following command: | 
 | $ apt-get install stress | 
 | $ stress --vm-bytes 7500M --vm 1 --vm-keep | 
 |  | 
 | 1. Migration throughput: 26 gigabits/second. | 
 | 2. Downtime (stop time) varies between 15 and 100 milliseconds. | 
 |  | 
 | EFFECTS of memory registration on bulk phase round: | 
 |  | 
 | For example, in the same 8GB RAM example with all 8GB of memory in | 
 | active use and the VM itself is completely idle using the same 40 gbps | 
 | infiniband link: | 
 |  | 
 | 1. rdma-pin-all disabled total time: approximately 7.5 seconds @ 9.5 Gbps | 
 | 2. rdma-pin-all enabled total time: approximately 4 seconds @ 26 Gbps | 
 |  | 
 | These numbers would of course scale up to whatever size virtual machine | 
 | you have to migrate using RDMA. | 
 |  | 
 | Enabling this feature does *not* have any measurable affect on | 
 | migration *downtime*. This is because, without this feature, all of the | 
 | memory will have already been registered already in advance during | 
 | the bulk round and does not need to be re-registered during the successive | 
 | iteration rounds. | 
 |  | 
 | RDMA Protocol Description: | 
 | ========================== | 
 |  | 
 | Migration with RDMA is separated into two parts: | 
 |  | 
 | 1. The transmission of the pages using RDMA | 
 | 2. Everything else (a control channel is introduced) | 
 |  | 
 | "Everything else" is transmitted using a formal | 
 | protocol now, consisting of infiniband SEND messages. | 
 |  | 
 | An infiniband SEND message is the standard ibverbs | 
 | message used by applications of infiniband hardware. | 
 | The only difference between a SEND message and an RDMA | 
 | message is that SEND messages cause notifications | 
 | to be posted to the completion queue (CQ) on the | 
 | infiniband receiver side, whereas RDMA messages (used | 
 | for VM's ram) do not (to behave like an actual DMA). | 
 |  | 
 | Messages in infiniband require two things: | 
 |  | 
 | 1. registration of the memory that will be transmitted | 
 | 2. (SEND only) work requests to be posted on both | 
 |    sides of the network before the actual transmission | 
 |    can occur. | 
 |  | 
 | RDMA messages are much easier to deal with. Once the memory | 
 | on the receiver side is registered and pinned, we're | 
 | basically done. All that is required is for the sender | 
 | side to start dumping bytes onto the link. | 
 |  | 
 | (Memory is not released from pinning until the migration | 
 | completes, given that RDMA migrations are very fast.) | 
 |  | 
 | SEND messages require more coordination because the | 
 | receiver must have reserved space (using a receive | 
 | work request) on the receive queue (RQ) before QEMUFileRDMA | 
 | can start using them to carry all the bytes as | 
 | a control transport for migration of device state. | 
 |  | 
 | To begin the migration, the initial connection setup is | 
 | as follows (migration-rdma.c): | 
 |  | 
 | 1. Receiver and Sender are started (command line or libvirt): | 
 | 2. Both sides post two RQ work requests | 
 | 3. Receiver does listen() | 
 | 4. Sender does connect() | 
 | 5. Receiver accept() | 
 | 6. Check versioning and capabilities (described later) | 
 |  | 
 | At this point, we define a control channel on top of SEND messages | 
 | which is described by a formal protocol. Each SEND message has a | 
 | header portion and a data portion (but together are transmitted | 
 | as a single SEND message). | 
 |  | 
 | Header: | 
 |     * Length               (of the data portion, uint32, network byte order) | 
 |     * Type                 (what command to perform, uint32, network byte order) | 
 |     * Repeat               (Number of commands in data portion, same type only) | 
 |  | 
 | The 'Repeat' field is here to support future multiple page registrations | 
 | in a single message without any need to change the protocol itself | 
 | so that the protocol is compatible against multiple versions of QEMU. | 
 | Version #1 requires that all server implementations of the protocol must | 
 | check this field and register all requests found in the array of commands located | 
 | in the data portion and return an equal number of results in the response. | 
 | The maximum number of repeats is hard-coded to 4096. This is a conservative | 
 | limit based on the maximum size of a SEND message along with empirical | 
 | observations on the maximum future benefit of simultaneous page registrations. | 
 |  | 
 | The 'type' field has 12 different command values: | 
 |      1. Unused | 
 |      2. Error                      (sent to the source during bad things) | 
 |      3. Ready                      (control-channel is available) | 
 |      4. QEMU File                  (for sending non-live device state) | 
 |      5. RAM Blocks request         (used right after connection setup) | 
 |      6. RAM Blocks result          (used right after connection setup) | 
 |      7. Compress page              (zap zero page and skip registration) | 
 |      8. Register request           (dynamic chunk registration) | 
 |      9. Register result            ('rkey' to be used by sender) | 
 |     10. Register finished          (registration for current iteration finished) | 
 |     11. Unregister request         (unpin previously registered memory) | 
 |     12. Unregister finished        (confirmation that unpin completed) | 
 |  | 
 | A single control message, as hinted above, can contain within the data | 
 | portion an array of many commands of the same type. If there is more than | 
 | one command, then the 'repeat' field will be greater than 1. | 
 |  | 
 | After connection setup, message 5 & 6 are used to exchange ram block | 
 | information and optionally pin all the memory if requested by the user. | 
 |  | 
 | After ram block exchange is completed, we have two protocol-level | 
 | functions, responsible for communicating control-channel commands | 
 | using the above list of values: | 
 |  | 
 | Logically: | 
 |  | 
 | qemu_rdma_exchange_recv(header, expected command type) | 
 |  | 
 | 1. We transmit a READY command to let the sender know that | 
 |    we are *ready* to receive some data bytes on the control channel. | 
 | 2. Before attempting to receive the expected command, we post another | 
 |    RQ work request to replace the one we just used up. | 
 | 3. Block on a CQ event channel and wait for the SEND to arrive. | 
 | 4. When the send arrives, librdmacm will unblock us. | 
 | 5. Verify that the command-type and version received matches the one we expected. | 
 |  | 
 | qemu_rdma_exchange_send(header, data, optional response header & data): | 
 |  | 
 | 1. Block on the CQ event channel waiting for a READY command | 
 |    from the receiver to tell us that the receiver | 
 |    is *ready* for us to transmit some new bytes. | 
 | 2. Optionally: if we are expecting a response from the command | 
 |    (that we have not yet transmitted), let's post an RQ | 
 |    work request to receive that data a few moments later. | 
 | 3. When the READY arrives, librdmacm will | 
 |    unblock us and we immediately post a RQ work request | 
 |    to replace the one we just used up. | 
 | 4. Now, we can actually post the work request to SEND | 
 |    the requested command type of the header we were asked for. | 
 | 5. Optionally, if we are expecting a response (as before), | 
 |    we block again and wait for that response using the additional | 
 |    work request we previously posted. (This is used to carry | 
 |    'Register result' commands #6 back to the sender which | 
 |    hold the rkey need to perform RDMA. Note that the virtual address | 
 |    corresponding to this rkey was already exchanged at the beginning | 
 |    of the connection (described below). | 
 |  | 
 | All of the remaining command types (not including 'ready') | 
 | described above all use the aforementioned two functions to do the hard work: | 
 |  | 
 | 1. After connection setup, RAMBlock information is exchanged using | 
 |    this protocol before the actual migration begins. This information includes | 
 |    a description of each RAMBlock on the server side as well as the virtual addresses | 
 |    and lengths of each RAMBlock. This is used by the client to determine the | 
 |    start and stop locations of chunks and how to register them dynamically | 
 |    before performing the RDMA operations. | 
 | 2. During runtime, once a 'chunk' becomes full of pages ready to | 
 |    be sent with RDMA, the registration commands are used to ask the | 
 |    other side to register the memory for this chunk and respond | 
 |    with the result (rkey) of the registration. | 
 | 3. Also, the QEMUFile interfaces also call these functions (described below) | 
 |    when transmitting non-live state, such as devices or to send | 
 |    its own protocol information during the migration process. | 
 | 4. Finally, zero pages are only checked if a page has not yet been registered | 
 |    using chunk registration (or not checked at all and unconditionally | 
 |    written if chunk registration is disabled. This is accomplished using | 
 |    the "Compress" command listed above. If the page *has* been registered | 
 |    then we check the entire chunk for zero. Only if the entire chunk is | 
 |    zero, then we send a compress command to zap the page on the other side. | 
 |  | 
 | Versioning and Capabilities | 
 | =========================== | 
 | Current version of the protocol is version #1. | 
 |  | 
 | The same version applies to both for protocol traffic and capabilities | 
 | negotiation. (i.e. There is only one version number that is referred to | 
 | by all communication). | 
 |  | 
 | librdmacm provides the user with a 'private data' area to be exchanged | 
 | at connection-setup time before any infiniband traffic is generated. | 
 |  | 
 | Header: | 
 |     * Version (protocol version validated before send/recv occurs), | 
 |                                                uint32, network byte order | 
 |     * Flags   (bitwise OR of each capability), | 
 |                                                uint32, network byte order | 
 |  | 
 | There is no data portion of this header right now, so there is | 
 | no length field. The maximum size of the 'private data' section | 
 | is only 192 bytes per the Infiniband specification, so it's not | 
 | very useful for data anyway. This structure needs to remain small. | 
 |  | 
 | This private data area is a convenient place to check for protocol | 
 | versioning because the user does not need to register memory to | 
 | transmit a few bytes of version information. | 
 |  | 
 | This is also a convenient place to negotiate capabilities | 
 | (like dynamic page registration). | 
 |  | 
 | If the version is invalid, we throw an error. | 
 |  | 
 | If the version is new, we only negotiate the capabilities that the | 
 | requested version is able to perform and ignore the rest. | 
 |  | 
 | Currently there is only one capability in Version #1: dynamic page registration | 
 |  | 
 | Finally: Negotiation happens with the Flags field: If the primary-VM | 
 | sets a flag, but the destination does not support this capability, it | 
 | will return a zero-bit for that flag and the primary-VM will understand | 
 | that as not being an available capability and will thus disable that | 
 | capability on the primary-VM side. | 
 |  | 
 | QEMUFileRDMA Interface: | 
 | ======================= | 
 |  | 
 | QEMUFileRDMA introduces a couple of new functions: | 
 |  | 
 | 1. qemu_rdma_get_buffer()               (QEMUFileOps rdma_read_ops) | 
 | 2. qemu_rdma_put_buffer()               (QEMUFileOps rdma_write_ops) | 
 |  | 
 | These two functions are very short and simply use the protocol | 
 | describe above to deliver bytes without changing the upper-level | 
 | users of QEMUFile that depend on a bytestream abstraction. | 
 |  | 
 | Finally, how do we handoff the actual bytes to get_buffer()? | 
 |  | 
 | Again, because we're trying to "fake" a bytestream abstraction | 
 | using an analogy not unlike individual UDP frames, we have | 
 | to hold on to the bytes received from control-channel's SEND | 
 | messages in memory. | 
 |  | 
 | Each time we receive a complete "QEMU File" control-channel | 
 | message, the bytes from SEND are copied into a small local holding area. | 
 |  | 
 | Then, we return the number of bytes requested by get_buffer() | 
 | and leave the remaining bytes in the holding area until get_buffer() | 
 | comes around for another pass. | 
 |  | 
 | If the buffer is empty, then we follow the same steps | 
 | listed above and issue another "QEMU File" protocol command, | 
 | asking for a new SEND message to re-fill the buffer. | 
 |  | 
 | Migration of VM's ram: | 
 | ==================== | 
 |  | 
 | At the beginning of the migration, (migration-rdma.c), | 
 | the sender and the receiver populate the list of RAMBlocks | 
 | to be registered with each other into a structure. | 
 | Then, using the aforementioned protocol, they exchange a | 
 | description of these blocks with each other, to be used later | 
 | during the iteration of main memory. This description includes | 
 | a list of all the RAMBlocks, their offsets and lengths, virtual | 
 | addresses and possibly includes pre-registered RDMA keys in case dynamic | 
 | page registration was disabled on the server-side, otherwise not. | 
 |  | 
 | Main memory is not migrated with the aforementioned protocol, | 
 | but is instead migrated with normal RDMA Write operations. | 
 |  | 
 | Pages are migrated in "chunks" (hard-coded to 1 Megabyte right now). | 
 | Chunk size is not dynamic, but it could be in a future implementation. | 
 | There's nothing to indicate that this is useful right now. | 
 |  | 
 | When a chunk is full (or a flush() occurs), the memory backed by | 
 | the chunk is registered with librdmacm is pinned in memory on | 
 | both sides using the aforementioned protocol. | 
 | After pinning, an RDMA Write is generated and transmitted | 
 | for the entire chunk. | 
 |  | 
 | Chunks are also transmitted in batches: This means that we | 
 | do not request that the hardware signal the completion queue | 
 | for the completion of *every* chunk. The current batch size | 
 | is about 64 chunks (corresponding to 64 MB of memory). | 
 | Only the last chunk in a batch must be signaled. | 
 | This helps keep everything as asynchronous as possible | 
 | and helps keep the hardware busy performing RDMA operations. | 
 |  | 
 | Error-handling: | 
 | =============== | 
 |  | 
 | Infiniband has what is called a "Reliable, Connected" | 
 | link (one of 4 choices). This is the mode in which | 
 | we use for RDMA migration. | 
 |  | 
 | If a *single* message fails, | 
 | the decision is to abort the migration entirely and | 
 | cleanup all the RDMA descriptors and unregister all | 
 | the memory. | 
 |  | 
 | After cleanup, the Virtual Machine is returned to normal | 
 | operation the same way that would happen if the TCP | 
 | socket is broken during a non-RDMA based migration. | 
 |  | 
 | TODO: | 
 | ===== | 
 | 1. Currently, 'ulimit -l' mlock() limits as well as cgroups swap limits | 
 |    are not compatible with infiniband memory pinning and will result in | 
 |    an aborted migration (but with the source VM left unaffected). | 
 | 2. Use of the recent /proc/<pid>/pagemap would likely speed up | 
 |    the use of KSM and ballooning while using RDMA. | 
 | 3. Also, some form of balloon-device usage tracking would also | 
 |    help alleviate some issues. | 
 | 4. Use LRU to provide more fine-grained direction of UNREGISTER | 
 |    requests for unpinning memory in an overcommitted environment. | 
 | 5. Expose UNREGISTER support to the user by way of workload-specific | 
 |    hints about application behavior. |