On 12/10/2019 04:10 AM, Kazuhito Hagio wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: piliu <pi...@redhat.com>
>> Sent: Monday, December 9, 2019 1:06 AM
>> To: Hagio Kazuhito(萩尾 一仁) <k-ha...@ab.jp.nec.com>; kexec@lists.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] makedumpfile: assign bitmap2 fd for sub process during
>> refiltering
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/07/2019 06:11 AM, Kazuhito Hagio wrote:
>>> Hi Pingfan,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> In refiltering mode, each sub process inherits bitmap2->fd from parent.
>>>> Then they lseek()/read() on the same fd, which means that they interference
>>>> with each other.
>>>>
>>>> This breaks the purpose of SPLITTING_FD_BITMAP(i) for each sub process.
>>>> Fix it by assigning a sub process dedicated fd to bitmap2->fd.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Pingfan Liu <pi...@redhat.com>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the patch.
>>> I'm still reading the code, but it might be better to apply this to
>>> bitmap1->fd
>>> as well? see you next week..
>> Yes. Although during my test, bitmap1 is not touched, but it is a
>> reasonable step to against any future bug.
>
> Reading the code, I think
> - the issue might occur not only in refiltering, but also the first filtering
> with --split and --work-dir option (forced non-cyclic mode).
> - pefer to gather things for --split option into writeout_multiple_dumpfiles()
> if we can, for readability.
Yes, all of the cases suffer from sharing fd across processes
>
> So does the following patch work for you and your test?
> I could not have reproduced the issue yet.
I tried to fetch a machine to test. It pass 50 times test with your
patch. While if without this patch, it failed about 1 out of 4 times.
>
> diff --git a/makedumpfile.c b/makedumpfile.c
> index b9e9dfbd45ba..674c6a00e2dd 100644
> --- a/makedumpfile.c
> +++ b/makedumpfile.c
> @@ -10091,6 +10091,10 @@ writeout_multiple_dumpfiles(void)
> info->split_start_pfn = SPLITTING_START_PFN(i);
> info->split_end_pfn = SPLITTING_END_PFN(i);
>
> + if (!info->flag_cyclic) {
> + info->bitmap1->fd = info->fd_bitmap;
> + info->bitmap2->fd = info->fd_bitmap;
> + }
> if (!reopen_dump_memory())
> exit(1);
> if ((status = writeout_dumpfile()) == FALSE)
>
>
> BTW, what do you see when the issue occurs? an error or broken dump?
The test case is refiltering, "makedumpfile --split -d 31
/root/vmcore-p9b-21 dumpfile_{1,2,3} 2>&1"
And it can not complete the dump.
Thanks,
Pingfan
>
> Thanks,
> Kazu
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pingfan
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Kazu
>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> makedumpfile.c | 3 ++-
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/makedumpfile.c b/makedumpfile.c
>>>> index d76a435..1dc8640 100644
>>>> --- a/makedumpfile.c
>>>> +++ b/makedumpfile.c
>>>> @@ -8857,7 +8857,8 @@ write_kdump_pages_and_bitmap_cyclic(struct
>>>> cache_data *cd_header, struct cache_d
>>>> if (info->flag_cyclic) {
>>>> if (!prepare_bitmap2_buffer())
>>>> return FALSE;
>>>> - }
>>>> + } else if (info->flag_refiltering)
>>>> + info->bitmap2->fd = info->fd_bitmap;
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> * Write pages and bitmap cyclically.
>>>> --
>>>> 2.7.5
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> kexec mailing list
>>> kexec@lists.infradead.org
>>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
>>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
