Hello, The code looks good to me, thanks Zhou. Now, I have a question on performance. >The issue is discussed at http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2014-March/011289.html > >This patch implements the idea of 2-pass algorhythm with smaller memory to manage splitblock table. >Exactly the algorhythm is still 3-pass,but the time of second pass is much shorter. >The tables below show the performence with different size of cyclic-buffer and splitblock. >The test is executed on the machine having 128G memory. > >the value is total time (including first pass and second pass). >the value in brackets is the time of second pass. Do you have any idea why the time of second pass is much larger when the splitblock-size is 2G ? I worry about the scalability. Thanks Atsushi Kumagai > sec > cyclic-buffer 1 2 4 8 16 32 > 64 >splitblock-size >1M 4.74(0.00) 4.22(0.01) 3.94(0.01) 3.78(0.02) 3.71(0.03) 3.73(0.07) > 3.74(0.10) >2M 4.74(0.00) 4.19(0.00) 3.94(0.01) 3.80(0.03) 3.71(0.03) 3.72(0.07) > 3.72(0.09) >4M 4.73(0.00) 4.21(0.01) 3.95(0.01) 3.78(0.02) 3.70(0.02) 3.73(0.08) > 3.73(0.10) >8M 4.73(0.00) 4.19(0.00) 3.94(0.01) 3.83(0.02) 3.73(0.03) 3.72(0.07) > 3.74(0.10) >16M 4.74(0.01) 4.21(0.00) 3.94(0.01) 3.76(0.01) 3.73(0.03) 3.73(0.08) > 3.74(0.10) >32M 4.72(0.00) 4.20(0.02) 3.92(0.01) 3.77(0.02) 3.71(0.02) 3.70(0.06) > 3.74(0.10) >64M 4.74(0.01) 4.20(0.00) 3.95(0.01) 3.78(0.02) 3.70(0.02) 3.71(0.07) > 3.72(0.09) >128M 4.73(0.01) 4.20(0.00) 3.94(0.01) 3.78(0.02) 3.76(0.03) 3.72(0.08) > 3.74(0.09) >256M 4.75(0.02) 4.22(0.02) 3.96(0.03) 3.78(0.02) 3.70(0.03) 3.70(0.07) > 3.74(0.11) >512M 4.77(0.04) 4.21(0.03) 3.97(0.04) 3.79(0.03) 3.73(0.04) 3.75(0.09) > 3.82(0.13) >1G 4.82(0.09) 4.26(0.07) 4.00(0.08) 3.83(0.07) 3.76(0.08) 3.73(0.08) > 3.76(0.12) >2G 8.26(3.54) 7.34(3.14) 6.86(2.93) 6.56(2.80) 6.44(2.76) 6.45(2.79) > 6.42(2.80) > >the performence of 3-pass algorhythm >origin 8.25(3.54) 7.26(3.11) 6.80(2.91) 6.52(2.80) 6.39(2.76) 6.40(2.78) > 6.45(2.85) > > > sec > cyclic-buffer 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 > 8192 >splitblock-size >1M 3.83(0.21) 3.94(0.33) 4.16(0.54) 4.61(0.99) 7.03(3.41) 8.73(5.11) > 8.69(5.08) >2M 3.86(0.21) 3.92(0.32) 4.16(0.54) 4.64(0.98) 7.02(3.41) 8.71(5.09) > 8.72(5.09) >4M 3.82(0.21) 3.95(0.32) 4.18(0.55) 4.62(0.99) 7.05(3.44) 8.70(5.09) > 8.68(5.07) >8M 3.82(0.21) 3.95(0.33) 4.17(0.54) 4.58(0.97) 7.03(3.41) 8.79(5.16) > 8.71(5.09) >16M 3.83(0.21) 3.93(0.31) 4.15(0.54) 4.60(0.98) 7.06(3.43) 8.76(5.13) > 8.73(5.10) >32M 3.84(0.22) 3.93(0.32) 4.15(0.54) 4.61(0.98) 7.00(3.40) 8.69(5.08) > 8.75(5.13) >64M 3.84(0.21) 3.94(0.33) 4.15(0.54) 4.60(0.98) 7.04(3.42) 8.74(5.10) > 8.80(5.16) >128M 3.85(0.22) 3.97(0.33) 4.16(0.54) 4.60(0.98) 7.07(3.44) 8.68(5.07) > 8.69(5.07) >256M 3.84(0.21) 3.94(0.33) 4.16(0.55) 4.64(1.00) 7.02(3.41) 8.74(5.11) > 8.73(5.11) >512M 3.85(0.24) 3.97(0.34) 4.17(0.56) 4.61(0.99) 7.05(3.44) 8.73(5.11) > 8.75(5.13) >1G 3.85(0.22) 3.96(0.35) 4.18(0.56) 4.65(1.00) 7.06(3.44) 8.76(5.12) > 8.72(5.11) >2G 6.53(2.91) 6.86(3.25) 7.54(3.92) 8.95(5.31) 10.60(6.97) 14.08(10.47) > 14.32(10.60) > >the performence of 3-pass algorhythm >origin 6.64(3.05) 6.81(3.24) 7.51(3.93) 8.86(5.30) 10.51(6.94) 13.92(10.36) > 14.11(10.55) > > >v1->v2: > use splitblock instead of block > add restriction (align to the page size) to splitblock size > adjust the position of prepare_splitblock_table and check the return code > use --splitblock-size to specify splitblock size and modify the print_info.c > > >Zhou Wenjian (5): > Add support for splitblock > Add tools for reading and writing from splitblock table > Add module of generating table > Add module of calculating start_pfn and end_pfn in each dumpfile > Add support for --splitblock-size > > makedumpfile.8 | 16 ++++ > makedumpfile.c | 254 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > makedumpfile.h | 17 ++++ > print_info.c | 16 ++++- > 4 files changed, 296 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > >_______________________________________________ >kexec mailing list >kexec at lists.infradead.org >http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
