[PATCH v1] Improve the performance of --num-threads -d 31
"Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑"
zhouwj-fnst at cn.fujitsu.com
Mon Feb 22 19:52:43 PST 2016
On 02/23/2016 10:16 AM, Minoru Usui wrote:
> Hello Zhou
>
> I'm sorry for late reply, too.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" [mailto:zhouwj-fnst at cn.fujitsu.com]
>> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 11:15 AM
>> To: Usui Minoru(碓井 成) <min-usui at ti.jp.nec.com>; kexec at lists.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] Improve the performance of --num-threads -d 31
>>
>> Hello Usui,
>>
>> Thanks very much for your comments.
>> And sorry for the late reply.
>>
>> See below.
>>
>> On 02/08/2016 01:00 PM, Minoru Usui wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: kexec [mailto:kexec-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Minoru Usui
>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 8:52 AM
>>>> To: Zhou Wenjian <zhouwj-fnst at cn.fujitsu.com>; kexec at lists.infradead.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] Improve the performance of --num-threads -d 31
>>>>
>>>> Hi, Zhou
>>>>
>>>> I have some comments.
>>>> I'm sorry if I have misunderstood your code.
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: kexec [mailto:kexec-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Zhou Wenjian
>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 3:22 PM
>>>>> To: kexec at lists.infradead.org
>>>>> Subject: [PATCH v1] Improve the performance of --num-threads -d 31
>>>>>
>>>>> v1:
>>>>> 1. change page_flag.ready's value to enum
>>>>> 2. change the patch description
>>>>> 3. cleanup some codes
>>>>> 4. fix a bug in cyclic mode
>>>>>
>>>>> multi-threads implementation will introduce extra cost when handling
>>>>> each page. The origin implementation will also do the extra work for
>>>>> filtered pages. So there is a big performance degradation in
>>>>> --num-threads -d 31.
>>>>> The new implementation won't do the extra work for filtered pages any
>>>>> more. So the performance of -d 31 is close to that of serial processing.
>>>>>
>>>>> The new implementation is just like the following:
>>>>> * The basic idea is producer producing page and consumer writing page.
>>>>> * Each producer have a page_flag_buf list which is used for storing
>>>>> page's description.
>>>>> * The size of page_flag_buf is little so it won't take too much memory.
>>>>> * And all producers will share a page_data_buf array which is
>>>>> used for storing page's compressed data.
>>>>> * The main thread is the consumer. It will find the next pfn and write
>>>>> it into file.
>>>>> * The next pfn is smallest pfn in all page_flag_buf.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhou Wenjian <zhouwj-fnst at cn.fujitsu.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> makedumpfile.c | 258 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>>>>> makedumpfile.h | 31 ++++---
>>>>> 2 files changed, 193 insertions(+), 96 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/makedumpfile.c b/makedumpfile.c
>>>>> index fa0b779..0ecd065 100644
>>>>> --- a/makedumpfile.c
>>>>> +++ b/makedumpfile.c
>>>>> @@ -3483,7 +3483,8 @@ initial_for_parallel()
>>>>> unsigned long page_data_buf_size;
>>>>> unsigned long limit_size;
>>>>> int page_data_num;
>>>>> - int i;
>>>>> + struct page_flag *current;
>>>>> + int i, j;
>>>>>
>>>>> len_buf_out = calculate_len_buf_out(info->page_size);
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -3562,8 +3563,10 @@ initial_for_parallel()
>>>>> - MAP_REGION * info->num_threads) * 0.6;
>>>>>
>>>>> page_data_num = limit_size / page_data_buf_size;
>>>>> + info->num_buffers = 3 * info->num_threads;
>>>>>
>>>>> - info->num_buffers = MIN(NUM_BUFFERS, page_data_num);
>>>>> + info->num_buffers = MAX(info->num_buffers, NUM_BUFFERS);
>>>>> + info->num_buffers = MIN(info->num_buffers, page_data_num);
>>>>>
>>>>> DEBUG_MSG("Number of struct page_data for produce/consume: %d\n",
>>>>> info->num_buffers);
>>>>> @@ -3588,6 +3591,36 @@ initial_for_parallel()
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /*
>>>>> + * initial page_flag for each thread
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if ((info->page_flag_buf = malloc(sizeof(void *) * info->num_threads))
>>>>> + == NULL) {
>>>>> + MSG("Can't allocate memory for page_flag_buf. %s\n",
>>>>> + strerror(errno));
>>>>> + return FALSE;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + memset(info->page_flag_buf, 0, sizeof(void *) * info->num_threads);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < info->num_threads; i++) {
>>>>> + if ((info->page_flag_buf[i] = malloc(sizeof(struct page_flag))) == NULL) {
>>>>
>>>> Fist element of struct page_flag in circular list is allocated by malloc(),
>>>> but other elements are allocated by calloc().(see below)
>>>> I think both elements should be allocated by calloc().
>>>>
>>
>> Yes, you are right.
>> I have made a mistake.
>>
>>>>> + MSG("Can't allocate memory for page_flag_buf. %s\n",
>>>>> + strerror(errno));
>>>>> + return FALSE;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + current = info->page_flag_buf[i];
>>>>> +
>>>>> + for (j = 1; j < NUM_BUFFERS; j++) {
>>>>> + if ((current->next = calloc(0, sizeof(struct page_flag))) == NULL) {
>>>>> + MSG("Can't allocate memory for data of page_data_buf. %s\n",
>>>>> + strerror(errno));
>>>>> + return FALSE;
>>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> First argument of calloc() should be 1, not 0.
>>>> And there is typo in error message.
>>>> Allocated element is not page_data_buf.
>>>>
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>>>>> + current = current->next;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + current->next = info->page_flag_buf[i];
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> * initial fd_memory for threads
>>>>> */
>>>>> for (i = 0; i < info->num_threads; i++) {
>>>>> @@ -3612,7 +3645,8 @@ initial_for_parallel()
>>>>> void
>>>>> free_for_parallel()
>>>>> {
>>>>> - int i;
>>>>> + int i, j;
>>>>> + struct page_flag *current;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (info->threads != NULL) {
>>>>> for (i = 0; i < info->num_threads; i++) {
>>>>> @@ -3655,6 +3689,19 @@ free_for_parallel()
>>>>> free(info->page_data_buf);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> + if (info->page_flag_buf != NULL) {
>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < info->num_threads; i++) {
>>>>> + for (j = 0; j < NUM_BUFFERS; j++) {
>>>>> + if (info->page_flag_buf[i] != NULL) {
>>>>> + current = info->page_flag_buf[i];
>>>>> + info->page_flag_buf[i] = current->next;
>>>>> + free(current);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + free(info->page_flag_buf);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> if (info->parallel_info == NULL)
>>>>> return;
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -7076,10 +7123,10 @@ kdump_thread_function_cyclic(void *arg) {
>>>>> void *retval = PTHREAD_FAIL;
>>>>> struct thread_args *kdump_thread_args = (struct thread_args *)arg;
>>>>> struct page_data *page_data_buf = kdump_thread_args->page_data_buf;
>>>>> + struct page_flag *page_flag_buf = kdump_thread_args->page_flag_buf;
>>>>> struct cycle *cycle = kdump_thread_args->cycle;
>>>>> - int page_data_num = kdump_thread_args->page_data_num;
>>>>> mdf_pfn_t pfn;
>>>>> - int index;
>>>>> + int index = kdump_thread_args->thread_num;
>>>>> int buf_ready;
>>>>> int dumpable;
>>>>> int fd_memory = 0;
>>>>> @@ -7125,47 +7172,47 @@ kdump_thread_function_cyclic(void *arg) {
>>>>> kdump_thread_args->thread_num);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> - while (1) {
>>>>> - /* get next pfn */
>>>>> - pthread_mutex_lock(&info->current_pfn_mutex);
>>>>> - pfn = info->current_pfn;
>>>>> - info->current_pfn++;
>>>>> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&info->current_pfn_mutex);
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * filtered page won't take anything
>>>>> + * unfiltered zero page will only take a page_flag_buf
>>>>> + * unfiltered non-zero page will take a page_flag_buf and a page_data_buf
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + while (page_flag_buf->pfn < kdump_thread_args->end_pfn) {
>>>>
>>>> At first, page_flag_buf->pfn is not initialized.
>>>> I think this block should be replaced with the following code.
>>>>
>>>> ===
>>>> do {
>>>> :
>>>> } while(page_flag_buf->pfn < kdump_thread_args->end_pfn)
>>>> ===
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, above suggestion is meaningless in terms of page_flag_buf->pfn is uninitialized.
>>> It should be replaced like following.
>>>
>>> ===
>>> while (1) {
>>> :
>>> while (buf_ready == FALSE) {
>>> :
>>> if (pfn >= kdump_thread_args->end_pfn) {
>>> :
>>> goto finish;
>>> }
>>> :
>>> }
>>> :
>>> }
>>> finish:
>>> ===
>>>
>>
>> page_flag_buf is allocated by calloc().
>> The page_flag_buf->pfn's value is 0.
>> So I think it is not necessary to modify the code.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Minoru Usui
>>>
>>>
>>>>> + buf_ready = FALSE;
>>>>>
>>>>> - if (pfn >= kdump_thread_args->end_pfn)
>>>>> - break;
>>>>> + while (page_data_buf[index].used != 0 ||
>>>>> + pthread_mutex_trylock(&page_data_buf[index].mutex) != 0)
>>>>> + index = (index + 1) % info->num_buffers;
>>>>>
>>>>> - index = -1;
>>>>> - buf_ready = FALSE;
>>>>> + page_data_buf[index].used = 1;
>>>>
>>>> "1" is a magic number.
>>>> It should be changed TRUE or FALSE.
>>>>
>>
>> I see.
>>
>>>>> while (buf_ready == FALSE) {
>>>>> pthread_testcancel();
>>>>> -
>>>>> - index = pfn % page_data_num;
>>>>> -
>>>>> - if (pfn - info->consumed_pfn > info->num_buffers)
>>>>> + if (page_flag_buf->ready == FLAG_READY)
>>>>> continue;
>>>>
>>>> At first, page_flag_buf->ready is uninitialized, too.
>>>> Should it be initialized in head part of this function, even if FLAG_UNUSED is defined 0?
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> The same topic as the page_flag_buf is allocated by calloc().
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - if (page_data_buf[index].ready != 0)
>>>>> - continue;
>>>>> -
>>>>> - pthread_mutex_lock(&page_data_buf[index].mutex);
>>>>> + /* get next pfn */
>>>>> + pthread_mutex_lock(&info->current_pfn_mutex);
>>>>> + pfn = info->current_pfn;
>>>>> + info->current_pfn++;
>>>>> + page_flag_buf->ready = FLAG_FILLING;
>>>>> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&info->current_pfn_mutex);
>>>>>
>>>>> - if (page_data_buf[index].ready != 0)
>>>>> - goto unlock;
>>>>> + page_flag_buf->pfn = pfn;
>>>>
>>>> It set FLAG_FILLING to page_flag_buf->ready before setting pfn to page_flag_buf->pfn.
>>>> But consumer gets page_flag_buf->pfn after checking page_flag_buf->ready != FLAG_UNUSED
>>>> in getting minimum pfn of each thread block.
>>>> Should it set page_flag_buf->pfn first?
>>>>
>>
>> Have you noticed the following code in the consumer?
>> <cut>
>> if (current_pfn == info->page_flag_buf[consuming]->pfn)
>> break;
>> <cut>
>
> No, I pointed following code.
> This part accesses info->page_flag_buf[i]->ready, then it accesses info->page_flag_buf[i]->pfn immediately.
> So, temp_pfn may be wrong pfn at this moment.
>
> ---
> for (i = 0; i < info->num_threads; i++) {
> if (info->page_flag_buf[i]->ready == FLAG_UNUSED)
> continue;
> temp_pfn = info->page_flag_buf[i]->pfn;
> ---
>
>> The consumer will check if the pfn is changed after the page_flag_buf->ready turns to be FLAG_READY.
>> So it's not important whether setting page_flag_buf->pfn first or not.
>
> As you said, consumer checks pfn which is changed.
> So it works well.
>
>> In the other hand, even setting page_flag_buf->pfn first, if the pfn is not dumpable, the producer
>> will also reset the page_flag_buf->pfn.
>
> Thank you for your explanation.
> I didn't notice that pfn can be undumpable.
>
>>>>>
>>>>> - buf_ready = TRUE;
>>>>> -
>>>>> - page_data_buf[index].pfn = pfn;
>>>>> - page_data_buf[index].ready = 1;
>>>>> + if (pfn >= kdump_thread_args->end_pfn) {
>>>>> + page_data_buf[index].used = 0;
>>>>> + page_flag_buf->ready = FLAG_READY;
>>>>> + info->current_pfn--;
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>> This block decrements info->current_pfn without info->current_pfn_mutex.
>>>> I think this block should be moved into previous pthread_mutex_lock(info->current_pfn_mutex) block, so it can remove.
>>>>
>>
>> Why do you think it should have current_pfn_mutex?
>>
>> If pfn >= kdump_thread_args->end_pfn, info->current_pfn will always larger than
>> kdump_thread_args->end_pfn. info->current_pfn-- won't affect anything.
>>
>> The decrement operation is for cyclic mode.
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> dumpable = is_dumpable(
>>>>> info->fd_bitmap ? &bitmap_parallel : info->bitmap2,
>>>>> pfn,
>>>>> cycle);
>>>>> - page_data_buf[index].dumpable = dumpable;
>>>>> if (!dumpable)
>>>>> - goto unlock;
>>>>> + continue;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (!read_pfn_parallel(fd_memory, pfn, buf,
>>>>> &bitmap_memory_parallel,
>>>>> @@ -7178,11 +7225,11 @@ kdump_thread_function_cyclic(void *arg) {
>>>>>
>>>>> if ((info->dump_level & DL_EXCLUDE_ZERO)
>>>>> && is_zero_page(buf, info->page_size)) {
>>>>> - page_data_buf[index].zero = TRUE;
>>>>> - goto unlock;
>>>>> + page_flag_buf->zero = TRUE;
>>>>> + goto next;
>>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> First, this code gets page_data_buf, then it gets page_flag_buf.
>>>> However, if processed pfn is zero page,
>>>> it processes next pfn while keeping page_data_buf.
>>>>
>>>> I think it should get page_flag_buf, then get page_data_buf
>>>> in order to shorten the holding period of the page_data_buf[index].mutex.
>>>>
>>
>> Do you mean the following logic?
>> 1. get the page_flag_buf first
>> 2. if the pfn is not zero page, then get the page_data_buf.
>
> Yes.
>
>> Think about the following case.
>> A producer get the page_flag_buf, and the pfn is not zero page.
>> It wants to get a page_data_buf, but there is no more page_data_buf.
>> Then ...
>
> It's not a problem.
> In not zero page case, this logic needs both page_flag_buf and page_data_buf,
> so waiting buffer is obvious when it isn't able to get page_flag_buf or page_data_buf.
>
Of course, waiting is not a problem.
But if other page_data_bufs are all used by later pfns, it will
wait forever. That's the problem.
--
Thanks
Zhou
>> Since there are several page_data_bufs, it's not a problem that each producer
>> will always hold a page_data_buf.
>
> It depends on the speed of consumer and producer.
> It's not possible to predict it.
>
> In zero page case, I think each producer executes more parallel theoretically
> if page_data_buf doesn't get.
>
> Thanks,
> Minoru Usui
>
>>
>> Thanks again for your comments.
>> And I will post the next version later.
>>
>> --
>> Thanks
>> Zhou
>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Minoru Usui
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - page_data_buf[index].zero = FALSE;
>>>>> + page_flag_buf->zero = FALSE;
>>>>>
>>>>> /*
>>>>> * Compress the page data.
>>>>> @@ -7232,12 +7279,16 @@ kdump_thread_function_cyclic(void *arg) {
>>>>> page_data_buf[index].size = info->page_size;
>>>>> memcpy(page_data_buf[index].buf, buf, info->page_size);
>>>>> }
>>>>> -unlock:
>>>>> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&page_data_buf[index].mutex);
>>>>> + page_flag_buf->index = index;
>>>>> + buf_ready = TRUE;
>>>>> +next:
>>>>> + page_flag_buf->ready = FLAG_READY;
>>>>> + page_flag_buf = page_flag_buf->next;
>>>>>
>>>>> }
>>>>> - }
>>>>>
>>>>> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&page_data_buf[index].mutex);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> retval = NULL;
>>>>>
>>>>> fail:
>>>>> @@ -7265,14 +7316,15 @@ write_kdump_pages_parallel_cyclic(struct cache_data *cd_header,
>>>>> struct page_desc pd;
>>>>> struct timeval tv_start;
>>>>> struct timeval last, new;
>>>>> - unsigned long long consuming_pfn;
>>>>> pthread_t **threads = NULL;
>>>>> struct thread_args *kdump_thread_args = NULL;
>>>>> void *thread_result;
>>>>> - int page_data_num;
>>>>> + int page_buf_num;
>>>>> struct page_data *page_data_buf = NULL;
>>>>> int i;
>>>>> int index;
>>>>> + int end_count, consuming, check_count;
>>>>> + mdf_pfn_t current_pfn, temp_pfn;
>>>>>
>>>>> if (info->flag_elf_dumpfile)
>>>>> return FALSE;
>>>>> @@ -7319,16 +7371,11 @@ write_kdump_pages_parallel_cyclic(struct cache_data *cd_header,
>>>>> threads = info->threads;
>>>>> kdump_thread_args = info->kdump_thread_args;
>>>>>
>>>>> - page_data_num = info->num_buffers;
>>>>> + page_buf_num = info->num_buffers;
>>>>> page_data_buf = info->page_data_buf;
>>>>>
>>>>> - for (i = 0; i < page_data_num; i++) {
>>>>> - /*
>>>>> - * producer will use pfn in page_data_buf to decide the
>>>>> - * consumed pfn
>>>>> - */
>>>>> - page_data_buf[i].pfn = start_pfn - 1;
>>>>> - page_data_buf[i].ready = 0;
>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < page_buf_num; i++) {
>>>>> + page_data_buf[i].used = 0;
>>>>> res = pthread_mutex_init(&page_data_buf[i].mutex, NULL);
>>>>> if (res != 0) {
>>>>> ERRMSG("Can't initialize mutex of page_data_buf. %s\n",
>>>>> @@ -7342,8 +7389,9 @@ write_kdump_pages_parallel_cyclic(struct cache_data *cd_header,
>>>>> kdump_thread_args[i].len_buf_out = len_buf_out;
>>>>> kdump_thread_args[i].start_pfn = start_pfn;
>>>>> kdump_thread_args[i].end_pfn = end_pfn;
>>>>> - kdump_thread_args[i].page_data_num = page_data_num;
>>>>> + kdump_thread_args[i].page_buf_num = page_buf_num;
>>>>> kdump_thread_args[i].page_data_buf = page_data_buf;
>>>>> + kdump_thread_args[i].page_flag_buf = info->page_flag_buf[i];
>>>>> kdump_thread_args[i].cycle = cycle;
>>>>>
>>>>> res = pthread_create(threads[i], NULL,
>>>>> @@ -7356,55 +7404,94 @@ write_kdump_pages_parallel_cyclic(struct cache_data *cd_header,
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> - consuming_pfn = start_pfn;
>>>>> - index = -1;
>>>>> + while (1) {
>>>>> + consuming = 0;
>>>>> + check_count = 0;
>>>>> + end_count = 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> - gettimeofday(&last, NULL);
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * The basic idea is producer producing page and consumer writing page.
>>>>> + * Each producer have a page_flag_buf list which is used for storing page's description.
>>>>> + * The size of page_flag_buf is little so it won't take too much memory.
>>>>> + * And all producers will share a page_data_buf array which is used for storing page's compressed data.
>>>>> + * The main thread is the consumer. It will find the next pfn and write it into file.
>>>>> + * The next pfn is smallest pfn in all page_flag_buf.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + while (1) {
>>>>> + current_pfn = end_pfn;
>>>>>
>>>>> - while (consuming_pfn < end_pfn) {
>>>>> - index = consuming_pfn % page_data_num;
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * page_flag_buf is in circular linked list.
>>>>> + * The array info->page_flag_buf[] records the current page_flag_buf in each thread's
>>>>> + * page_flag_buf list.
>>>>> + * consuming is used for recording in which thread the pfn is the smallest.
>>>>> + * current_pfn is used for recording the value of pfn when checking the pfn.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < info->num_threads; i++) {
>>>>> + if (info->page_flag_buf[i]->ready == FLAG_UNUSED)
>>>>> + continue;
>>>>> + temp_pfn = info->page_flag_buf[i]->pfn;
>>>>>
>>>>> - gettimeofday(&new, NULL);
>>>>> - if (new.tv_sec - last.tv_sec > WAIT_TIME) {
>>>>> - ERRMSG("Can't get data of pfn %llx.\n", consuming_pfn);
>>>>> - goto out;
>>>>> - }
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * count how many threads have reached the end.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if (temp_pfn >= end_pfn) {
>>>>> + end_count++;
>>>>> + info->page_flag_buf[i]->ready = FLAG_UNUSED;
>>>>> + continue;
>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> - /*
>>>>> - * check pfn first without mutex locked to reduce the time
>>>>> - * trying to lock the mutex
>>>>> - */
>>>>> - if (page_data_buf[index].pfn != consuming_pfn)
>>>>> - continue;
>>>>> + if (current_pfn < temp_pfn)
>>>>> + continue;
>>>>>
>>>>> - if (pthread_mutex_trylock(&page_data_buf[index].mutex) != 0)
>>>>> - continue;
>>>>> + check_count++;
>>>>> + consuming = i;
>>>>> + current_pfn = temp_pfn;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * If all the threads have reached the end, we will finish writing.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if (end_count >= info->num_threads)
>>>>> + goto finish;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * Since it has the probabilty that there is no page_flag_buf being ready,
>>>>> + * we should recheck if it happens.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + if (check_count == 0)
>>>>> + continue;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * When we check the pfn in page_flag_buf, it may be being produced.
>>>>> + * So we should wait until it is ready to use. And if the pfn is
>>>>> + * different from the value when we check, we should rechoose the buf.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + gettimeofday(&last, NULL);
>>>>> + while (info->page_flag_buf[consuming]->ready != FLAG_READY) {
>>>>> + gettimeofday(&new, NULL);
>>>>> + if (new.tv_sec - last.tv_sec > WAIT_TIME) {
>>>>> + ERRMSG("Can't get data of pfn.\n");
>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> - /* check whether the found one is ready to be consumed */
>>>>> - if (page_data_buf[index].pfn != consuming_pfn ||
>>>>> - page_data_buf[index].ready != 1) {
>>>>> - goto unlock;
>>>>> + if (current_pfn == info->page_flag_buf[consuming]->pfn)
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> if ((num_dumped % per) == 0)
>>>>> print_progress(PROGRESS_COPY, num_dumped, info->num_dumpable);
>>>>>
>>>>> - /* next pfn is found, refresh last here */
>>>>> - last = new;
>>>>> - consuming_pfn++;
>>>>> - info->consumed_pfn++;
>>>>> - page_data_buf[index].ready = 0;
>>>>> -
>>>>> - if (page_data_buf[index].dumpable == FALSE)
>>>>> - goto unlock;
>>>>> -
>>>>> num_dumped++;
>>>>>
>>>>> - if (page_data_buf[index].zero == TRUE) {
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (info->page_flag_buf[consuming]->zero == TRUE) {
>>>>> if (!write_cache(cd_header, pd_zero, sizeof(page_desc_t)))
>>>>> goto out;
>>>>> pfn_zero++;
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> + index = info->page_flag_buf[consuming]->index;
>>>>> pd.flags = page_data_buf[index].flags;
>>>>> pd.size = page_data_buf[index].size;
>>>>> pd.page_flags = 0;
>>>>> @@ -7420,12 +7507,12 @@ write_kdump_pages_parallel_cyclic(struct cache_data *cd_header,
>>>>> */
>>>>> if (!write_cache(cd_page, page_data_buf[index].buf, pd.size))
>>>>> goto out;
>>>>> -
>>>>> + page_data_buf[index].used = 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>> -unlock:
>>>>> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&page_data_buf[index].mutex);
>>>>> + info->page_flag_buf[consuming]->ready = FLAG_UNUSED;
>>>>> + info->page_flag_buf[consuming] = info->page_flag_buf[consuming]->next;
>>>>> }
>>>>> -
>>>>> +finish:
>>>>> ret = TRUE;
>>>>> /*
>>>>> * print [100 %]
>>>>> @@ -7464,7 +7551,7 @@ out:
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> if (page_data_buf != NULL) {
>>>>> - for (i = 0; i < page_data_num; i++) {
>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < page_buf_num; i++) {
>>>>> pthread_mutex_destroy(&page_data_buf[i].mutex);
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -7564,6 +7651,7 @@ write_kdump_pages_cyclic(struct cache_data *cd_header, struct cache_data *cd_pag
>>>>> num_dumped++;
>>>>> if (!read_pfn(pfn, buf))
>>>>> goto out;
>>>>> +
>>>>> filter_data_buffer(buf, pfn_to_paddr(pfn), info->page_size);
>>>>>
>>>>> /*
>>>>> diff --git a/makedumpfile.h b/makedumpfile.h
>>>>> index e0b5bbf..8a9a5b2 100644
>>>>> --- a/makedumpfile.h
>>>>> +++ b/makedumpfile.h
>>>>> @@ -977,7 +977,7 @@ typedef unsigned long long int ulonglong;
>>>>> #define PAGE_DATA_NUM (50)
>>>>> #define WAIT_TIME (60 * 10)
>>>>> #define PTHREAD_FAIL ((void *)-2)
>>>>> -#define NUM_BUFFERS (50)
>>>>> +#define NUM_BUFFERS (20)
>>>>>
>>>>> struct mmap_cache {
>>>>> char *mmap_buf;
>>>>> @@ -985,28 +985,36 @@ struct mmap_cache {
>>>>> off_t mmap_end_offset;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> +enum {
>>>>> + FLAG_UNUSED,
>>>>> + FLAG_READY,
>>>>> + FLAG_FILLING
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +struct page_flag {
>>>>> + mdf_pfn_t pfn;
>>>>> + char zero;
>>>>> + char ready;
>>>>> + short index;
>>>>> + struct page_flag *next;
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>> struct page_data
>>>>> {
>>>>> - mdf_pfn_t pfn;
>>>>> - int dumpable;
>>>>> - int zero;
>>>>> - unsigned int flags;
>>>>> + pthread_mutex_t mutex;
>>>>> long size;
>>>>> unsigned char *buf;
>>>>> - pthread_mutex_t mutex;
>>>>> - /*
>>>>> - * whether the page_data is ready to be consumed
>>>>> - */
>>>>> - int ready;
>>>>> + int flags;
>>>>> + int used;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> struct thread_args {
>>>>> int thread_num;
>>>>> unsigned long len_buf_out;
>>>>> mdf_pfn_t start_pfn, end_pfn;
>>>>> - int page_data_num;
>>>>> + int page_buf_num;
>>>>> struct cycle *cycle;
>>>>> struct page_data *page_data_buf;
>>>>> + struct page_flag *page_flag_buf;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> /*
>>>>> @@ -1295,6 +1303,7 @@ struct DumpInfo {
>>>>> pthread_t **threads;
>>>>> struct thread_args *kdump_thread_args;
>>>>> struct page_data *page_data_buf;
>>>>> + struct page_flag **page_flag_buf;
>>>>> pthread_rwlock_t usemmap_rwlock;
>>>>> mdf_pfn_t current_pfn;
>>>>> pthread_mutex_t current_pfn_mutex;
>>>>> --
>>>>> 1.8.3.1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> kexec mailing list
>>>>> kexec at lists.infradead.org
>>>>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> kexec mailing list
>>>> kexec at lists.infradead.org
>>>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
>>>
>>>
>>
More information about the kexec
mailing list