Hello Zhou I'm sorry for late reply, too.
> -----Original Message----- > From: "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, February 15, 2016 11:15 AM > To: Usui Minoru(碓井 成) <[email protected]>; [email protected] > 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:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Minoru > >> Usui > >> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 8:52 AM > >> To: Zhou Wenjian <[email protected]>; [email protected] > >> 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:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Zhou > >>> Wenjian > >>> Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 3:22 PM > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> 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 <[email protected]> > >>> --- > >>> 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. > 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 > >>> [email protected] > >>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> kexec mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec > > > > > _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
