On 02/22/2017 11:18 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:09:23AM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually it shouldn't. If you extend the kcmp argument to accept the
>>>> epollfd:epollslot pair, this would be effectively the same as if you
>>>> had all your epoll-ed files injected into your fdtable with "strange"
>>>> fd numbers. We already have two-level rbtree for this in criu, adding
>>>> extended ("strange") fd to it should be OK.
>>>
>>> Nope. Pavel, I guess you forget how we handle file tree in criu currently.
>>> We call for kcmp only if we have to -- when primary key for two entries
>>> is the same.
>>
>> True, but the latter is an optimization to reduce the number of syscalls.
>
> Exactly. While syscalls are quite effective, they are still not coming
> for free, so I'm trying to reduce their number as much as possible.
>
>> Look, in order to have a primary key you need to do some system call for the
>> fd you check (read from proc or stat the descriptor). But for target files in
>> e-polls you don't make this per-fd syscall to get primary key, just call the
>> kcmp instead.
>
> I have to parse fdinfo anyway, because I need to fetch queued events and mask.
> So I'll _have_ to make this per-fd syscall for parsing. And this opens
> a way to optimize overall picture -- we can immediately read primary
> key and reduce kcmp calls.
You read fdinfo per-epoll, but kcmp-s we're talking here are about per-target-files.
So having dev:ino pair would help to reduce the number of kcmps, but even w/o
this extension we can work OK.
Besides, in most of the cases fd number you'd read from epoll's fdinfo will actually
be present in task's fdtable, so you can call a single kcmp, make sure the file is
correct and that's it. The need to actually _search_ for the runaway file with the
set of kcmp will (should) be quite rare case.
-- Pavel
