On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 2:47 PM shivang upadhyay <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Lijiang,
>
> Thanks for checking the patch.
>
> On 12/3/25 7:09 AM, lijiang wrote:
> > Hi, Shivang
> > Thank you for the patch.
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 4:18 AM <
> [email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 16:23:46 +0530
> >> From: Shivang Upadhyay <[email protected]>
> >> Subject: [Crash-utility] [PATCH] make the MAX_MALLOC_BUFS customizable
> >> To: [email protected], [email protected]
> >> Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
> >> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> >>
> >> default value is kept to 2000, but can be changed with
> >> command line with flag `--max-malloc-bufs`.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Shivang Upadhyay <[email protected]>
> >> ---
> >>   defs.h  | 1 +
> >>   main.c  | 4 ++++
> >>   tools.c | 9 ++++++---
> >>   3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/defs.h b/defs.h
> >> index ab4aee8..863baf9 100644
> >> --- a/defs.h
> >> +++ b/defs.h
> >> @@ -5608,6 +5608,7 @@ void exec_args_input_file(struct
> command_table_entry
> >> *, struct args_input_file *
> >>   /*
> >>    *  tools.c
> >>    */
> >> +extern int MAX_MALLOC_BUFS;
> >>   FILE *set_error(char *);
> >>   int __error(int, char *, ...);
> >>   #define error __error               /* avoid conflict with gdb
> error() */
> >> diff --git a/main.c b/main.c
> >> index 71bcc15..e986792 100644
> >> --- a/main.c
> >> +++ b/main.c
> >> @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static struct option long_options[] = {
> >>          {"version", 0, 0, 0},
> >>          {"buildinfo", 0, 0, 0},
> >>           {"cpus", required_argument, 0, 0},
> >> +        {"max-malloc-bufs", required_argument, 0, 0},
> >>           {"no_ikconfig", 0, 0, 0},
> >>           {"hyper", 0, 0, 0},
> >>          {"p2m_mfn", required_argument, 0, 0},
> >> @@ -163,6 +164,9 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
> >>                          else if (STREQ(long_options[option_index].name,
> >> "cpus"))
> >>                                  kt->cpus_override = optarg;
> >>
> >> +                       else if (STREQ(long_options[option_index].name,
> >> "max-malloc-bufs"))
> >> +                               MAX_MALLOC_BUFS = atoi(optarg);
> >> +
> >>                          else if (STREQ(long_options[option_index].name,
> >> "hyper"))
> >>                                  pc->flags |= XEN_HYPER;
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tools.c b/tools.c
> >> index a9ad18d..c9867e1 100644
> >> --- a/tools.c
> >> +++ b/tools.c
> >> @@ -5698,7 +5698,7 @@ ll_power(long long base, long long exp)
> >>   #define B32K (4)
> >>
> >>   #define SHARED_BUF_SIZES  (B32K+1)
> >> -#define MAX_MALLOC_BUFS   (2000)
> >> +int MAX_MALLOC_BUFS  = 2000; /* can be changed from command line args
> */
> >>
> > Think it again and discuss with customers, that should be good to fold
> > these two patches into one patch:
> >
> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01829.html
> >
> >
> > That is to say, increase the default MAX_MALLOC_BUFS and also introduce
> the
> > --max-malloc-bufs options, which can handle both cases:
> > 1. most customers never hit the max limit
> > 2. deal with large vmcores without blocking analysis
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Thank
> > Lianbo
>
> I think its a good Idea. I can send the amended patch.
>

Thank you so much, Shivang.
Also let's see if Tao and Kazu have any concerns about it.

Lianbo


>
> ~Shivang.
>
>
--
Crash-utility mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://${domain_name}/admin/lists/devel.lists.crash-utility.osci.io/
Contribution Guidelines: https://github.com/crash-utility/crash/wiki

Reply via email to