From: Dan Smith <danms-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: Oren Laadan <orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org,
matthltc-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clear the objhash before completing restart, but delay free (v2)
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 10:01:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87oca9vuyw.fsf@localhost6.localdomain6> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CCEE9AD.7010105-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org> (Oren Laadan's message of "Mon\, 01 Nov 2010 12\:24\:13 -0400")
OL> Does this patch solve the performance problem in freeing all
OL> the objhash entries upfront (e.g. before letting userspace
OL> resume) ?
OL> If so, is there still a performance hit for doing the 'clear'
OL> portion early before resuming the tasks ? How much does it
OL> depend on the complexity of the hierarchy being checkpointed ?
I've actually been unable to detect any real different in performance
between this and the way it was before. I've run it against several
different large checkpoints (multiple processes, with sockets, IPC,
many files open, etc). I have another option for the functionality,
which is to mark only specific items as needing to be free()'d early,
but I can't discern a difference between that or this option either.
What I can discern is that this patch is more likely to prevent
similar issues in the future by making the behavior of the hash far
more generally correct, IMHO.
--
Dan Smith
IBM Linux Technology Center
email: danms-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-01 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-19 14:03 [PATCH] Clear the objhash before completing restart, but delay free (v2) Dan Smith
[not found] ` <1287496991-18207-1-git-send-email-danms-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2010-10-19 18:46 ` Matt Helsley
2010-11-01 16:24 ` Oren Laadan
[not found] ` <4CCEE9AD.7010105-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org>
2010-11-01 17:01 ` Dan Smith [this message]
[not found] ` <87oca9vuyw.fsf-bi+AKbBUZKagILUCTcTcHdKyNwTtLsGr@public.gmane.org>
2010-11-01 17:50 ` Oren Laadan
[not found] ` <4CCEFDD4.1030308-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org>
2010-11-01 18:10 ` Dan Smith
2011-02-01 0:31 ` Oren Laadan
[not found] ` <4D47544E.7080600-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org>
2011-02-01 19:38 ` Dan Smith
[not found] ` <87pqrb5yvn.fsf-FLMGYpZoEPULwtHQx/6qkW3U47Q5hpJU@public.gmane.org>
2011-02-02 14:55 ` Oren Laadan
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=87oca9vuyw.fsf@localhost6.localdomain6 \
--to=danms-r/jw6+rmf7hqt0dzr+alfa@public.gmane.org \
--cc=containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org \
--cc=matthltc-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org \
--cc=orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org \
/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.