All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lisa Mitchell <lisa.mitchell@hp.com>
To: Atsushi Kumagai <kumagai-atsushi@mxc.nes.nec.co.jp>
Cc: "kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Hoemann, Jerry" <jerry.hoemann@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] makedumpfile-1.5.1 RC
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 10:20:43 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1355851243.13097.908.camel@lisamlinux.fc.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121213140648.d4f3a203fcf3bad6d7e80510@mxc.nes.nec.co.jp>

On Thu, 2012-12-13 at 05:06 +0000, Atsushi Kumagai wrote:

> 
> In cyclic mode, we can save only a chunk of bitmap at a time, 
> this fact forces us to scan each cyclic region twice as below:
> 
>   Step1: To determine the offset of kdump's page data region.
>   Step2: To distinguish whether each page is unnecessary or not.
> 
> Step1 should be done before writing phase (write_kdump_pages_and_bitmap_cyclic())
> and step2 is run while writing phase, the whole scan is needed for
> each step.
> On the other hand, v1.4 can execute both step1 and step2 with the temporary
> bitmap file, the whole scan is done just one time to create the file.
> 
> It's a disadvantage in performance, but I think it's unavoidable.
> (There is the exception when the number of cycles is 1, but current
> version also scan twice in spite of redundancy.)
> 
> If more performance is needed, I think we should invent other
> approaches like the idea discussed in the thread below:
> 
>   http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2012-December/007494.html
> 
> Besides, I think v1.4 with the local disc which can contain the temporary
> bitmap file is the fastest version for now.
> 
> > Atushi, am I using the new makedumpfile 1.5.1GA correctly with the
> > kernel patch? 
> 
> Yes, I think you can use mem_map array logic correctly with the patch.
> And you can confirm it with -D option. If you didn't meet the conditions
> to use mem_map array logic, the message below will be showed.
> 
>   "Can't select page_is_buddy handler; follow free lists instead of mem_map array."
> 
> > I didn't understand how to use the options of makedumpfile you
> > mentioned, and when I tried with a vmlinux file, and the -x option,
> > makedumpfile didn't even start, just failed and reset. 
> 
> It might be another problem related -x option.
> For investigation, could you run the command below and show its messages ?
> There is no need to run in 2nd kernel environment.
> 
>   # makedumpfile -g vmcoreinfo -x vmlinux
> 
> 
> Thanks
> Atsushi Kumagai
> 


Thanks for this info, Atsushi.

I was able to test makedumpfile-v1.5.1 on the 4 TB DL980 we had this
weekend, along with the kexec patch to invoke the memory array logic,
and I got encouraging results, in that the difference  in dump time
between makedumpfile 1.4  on a RHEL 6.3 system and makedumpfile-v1.5.1
with the memory array logic seems to be now very small:


Here are my results (file system timestamp data and note the system had
it's filesystem time set way in the past):

					

1.  makedumpfile 1.4 (RHEL 6.3 default), crashkernel 512M:

       root@spb crash]# ls -al --time-style=full-iso
127.0.0.1-2012-05-09-19:55:50^M
total 10757984^M
drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root        4096 2012-05-09 21:53:21.289507559
-0600 .^M
drwxr-xr-x. 4 root root        4096 2012-05-09 22:10:08.729553037
-0600 ..^M
-rw-------. 1 root root 11016160846 2012-05-09 21:53:21.020384817 -0600
vmcore^

21:53:21 - 19:55:50 

Dump filter/copy time:  1 hour, 57 minutes, 29 seconds


2. makedumpfile-v1.5.1, with kexec patch, using memory array logic, took
3 dumps to see variations in times:

ls -al --time-style=full-iso 127.0.0.1-2012-05-10-23:42:35^M
total 10444952^M
drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root        4096 2012-05-11 01:52:18.512639105
-0600 .^M
drwxr-xr-x. 6 root root        4096 2012-05-10 23:42:39.270955565
-0600 ..^M
-rw-------. 1 root root 10695618226 2012-05-11 01:52:18.479636812 -0600
vmcore^M

Dump filter/copy time: 2 hours, 9 minutes, 11 sec


127.0.0.1-2012-05-12-20:57:08:^M
total 10469304^M
drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root        4096 2012-05-12 23:05:39.082084132
-0600 .^M
drwxr-xr-x. 5 root root        4096 2012-05-12 20:57:12.627084279
-0600 ..^M
-rw-------. 1 root root 10720553208 2012-05-12 23:05:39.051082490 -0600
vmcore^M


Dump filter/copy time:  2 hours     8 minutes  26 seconds

27.0.0.1-2012-05-10-09:52:17:^M
total 10650776^M
drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root        4096 2012-05-10 12:04:22.456078284
-0600 .^M
drwxr-xr-x. 6 root root        4096 2012-05-10 09:52:22.068605263
-0600 ..^M
-rw-------. 1 root root 10906381384 2012-05-10 12:04:22.425076466 -0600
vmcore

Dump filter/copy time: 2 hours 13 minutes

So the dump times seem to vary + or minus 2-3 minutes, and the average
was about 2 hours 10 minutes, or 10-12 minutes longer than the
makedumpfile 1.4 dump time for a 4 TB system, when using a crashkernel
constrained to 384 MB, and the cyclic buffer feature is used.








_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

  reply	other threads:[~2012-12-18 21:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-16  8:15 [RFC] makedumpfile-1.5.1 RC Atsushi Kumagai
2012-11-20 12:14 ` Lisa Mitchell
2012-11-20 16:35   ` Vivek Goyal
2012-11-20 13:03     ` Lisa Mitchell
2012-11-20 21:46       ` Vivek Goyal
2012-11-20 19:05         ` Lisa Mitchell
2012-11-21 13:54           ` Vivek Goyal
2012-11-22  0:49             ` Hatayama, Daisuke
2012-11-26 16:02               ` Vivek Goyal
2012-12-04 13:31   ` Lisa Mitchell
2012-12-07  5:26     ` Atsushi Kumagai
2012-12-10 21:06       ` Lisa Mitchell
2012-12-13  5:06         ` Atsushi Kumagai
2012-12-18 17:20           ` Lisa Mitchell [this message]
2012-12-21  6:19             ` Atsushi Kumagai

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1355851243.13097.908.camel@lisamlinux.fc.hp.com \
    --to=lisa.mitchell@hp.com \
    --cc=jerry.hoemann@hp.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=kumagai-atsushi@mxc.nes.nec.co.jp \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.