[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0910DD04CBD6DE4193FCF86B9C00BE971C86DC@BPXM01GP.gisp.nec.co.jp>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 04:23:19 +0000
From: Atsushi Kumagai <kumagai-atsushi@....nes.nec.co.jp>
To: HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@...fujitsu.com>
CC: "bhe@...hat.com" <bhe@...hat.com>,
"tom.vaden@...com" <tom.vaden@...com>,
"kexec@...ts.infradead.org" <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
"ptesarik@...e.cz" <ptesarik@...e.cz>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"lisa.mitchell@...com" <lisa.mitchell@...com>,
"vgoyal@...hat.com" <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
"anderson@...hat.com" <anderson@...hat.com>,
"ebiederm@...ssion.com" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"jingbai.ma@...com" <jingbai.ma@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] makedumpfile: hugepage filtering for vmcore dump
On 2013/11/29 12:24:45, kexec <kexec-bounces@...ts.infradead.org> wrote:
> (2013/11/29 12:02), Atsushi Kumagai wrote:
> > On 2013/11/28 16:50:21, kexec <kexec-bounces@...ts.infradead.org> wrote:
> >>>> ping, in case you overlooked this...
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for the delayed response, I prioritize the release of v1.5.5 now.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for your advice, check_cyclic_buffer_overrun() should be fixed
> >>> as you said. In addition, I'm considering other way to address such case,
> >>> that is to bring the number of "overflowed pages" to the next cycle and
> >>> exclude them at the top of __exclude_unnecessary_pages() like below:
> >>>
> >>> /*
> >>> * The pages which should be excluded still remain.
> >>> */
> >>> if (remainder >= 1) {
> >>> int i;
> >>> unsigned long tmp;
> >>> for (i = 0; i < remainder; ++i) {
> >>> if (clear_bit_on_2nd_bitmap_for_kernel(pfn + i)) {
> >>> pfn_user++;
> >>> tmp++;
> >>> }
> >>> }
> >>> pfn += tmp;
> >>> remainder -= tmp;
> >>> mem_map += (tmp - 1) * SIZE(page);
> >>> continue;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> If this way works well, then aligning info->buf_size_cyclic will be
> >>> unnecessary.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I selected the current implementation of changing cyclic buffer size becuase
> >> I thought it was simpler than carrying over remaining filtered pages to next cycle
> >> in that there was no need to add extra code in filtering processing.
> >>
> >> I guess the reason why you think this is better now is how to detect maximum order of
> >> huge page is hard in some way, right?
> >
> > The maximum order will be gotten from HUGETLB_PAGE_ORDER or HPAGE_PMD_ORDER,
> > so I don't say it's hard. However, the carrying over method doesn't depend on
> > such kernel symbols, so I think it's robuster.
> >
>
> Then, it's better to remove check_cyclic_buffer_overrun() and rewrite part of free page
> filtering in __exclude_unnecessary_pages(). Could you do that too?
Sure, I'll modify it too.
Thanks
Atsushi Kumagai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists