On 02/23/2016 10:16 AM, Minoru Usui wrote: > Hello Zhou > > I'm sorry for late reply, too. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: "Zhou, Wenjian/???" [mailto:zhouwj-fnst at cn.fujitsu.com] >> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 11:15 AM >> To: Usui Minoru(?? ?) <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 >>> >>> >>
