From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2236C433DF for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:01:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AC6020786 for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:01:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="P3B2nFU9" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1AC6020786 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:52530 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k3jGf-0007l4-RK for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 13:01:25 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42908) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k3jFp-0007Kr-OJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 13:00:33 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-2.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.61]:59718 helo=us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k3jFo-0007SQ-6F for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 13:00:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1596733231; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=oa2IBHIg+V4BEzf8CxZjWoAfZhwr+Zd9/tRNm8F3Y88=; b=P3B2nFU9qC7GLZFZtxPRDLMIVUZEF4C6GScsmyonR62MAW8ic2Uu7XIYWTl1KTvgbgzofy 7OeiCiiy8MkBTvM+0KjWC9tMPBLlWEbPNoZB5QqPVgUxm75TSxUaVgAPo5mbetq6qs6qaw 1HlE1CKXzCUOYdk+fpATtn8a2+/8JgU= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-469-iuw2cOsaNMOgoWHuLtYdJg-1; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 12:59:09 -0400 X-MC-Unique: iuw2cOsaNMOgoWHuLtYdJg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFC30800688; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 16:59:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from work-vm (ovpn-114-105.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.105]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 231DD65C91; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 16:59:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:59:02 +0100 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" To: Zheng Chuan Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/8] migration/dirtyrate: Add block_dirty_info to store dirtypage info Message-ID: <20200806165902.GJ2711@work-vm> References: <1595646669-109310-1-git-send-email-zhengchuan@huawei.com> <1595646669-109310-3-git-send-email-zhengchuan@huawei.com> <20200804162829.GE2659@work-vm> <8ac6e996-b01d-9b7c-3f7a-aeb2b376cfa1@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8ac6e996-b01d-9b7c-3f7a-aeb2b376cfa1@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.14.6 (2020-07-11) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dgilbert@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.139.110.61; envelope-from=dgilbert@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/06 00:07:42 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -40 X-Spam_score: -4.1 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com, quintela@redhat.com, linyilu@huawei.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, alex.chen@huawei.com, ann.zhuangyanying@huawei.com, fangying1@huawei.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" * Zheng Chuan (zhengchuan@huawei.com) wrote: > > > On 2020/8/5 0:28, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Chuan Zheng (zhengchuan@huawei.com) wrote: > >> From: Zheng Chuan > >> > >> Add block_dirty_info to store dirtypage info for each ramblock > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Zheng Chuan > >> Signed-off-by: YanYing Zhang > >> --- > >> migration/dirtyrate.h | 13 +++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/migration/dirtyrate.h b/migration/dirtyrate.h > >> index 9a5c228..342b89f 100644 > >> --- a/migration/dirtyrate.h > >> +++ b/migration/dirtyrate.h > >> @@ -33,6 +33,19 @@ typedef enum { > >> CAL_DIRTY_RATE_END = 2, > >> } CalculatingDirtyRateStage; > >> > >> +/* > >> + * Store dirtypage info for each block. > >> + */ > >> +struct block_dirty_info { > > > > Please call this ramblock_dirty_info; we use 'block' a lot to mean > > disk block and it gets confusing. > > > Sure, ramblock_dirty_info is better. > > >> + char idstr[BLOCK_INFO_MAX_LEN]; > > > > Is there a reason you don't just use a RAMBlock * here? > > > >> + uint8_t *block_addr; > >> + unsigned long block_pages; > >> + unsigned long *sample_page_vfn; > > > > Please comment these; if I understand correctly, that's an array > > of page indexes into the block generated from the random numbers > > > >> + unsigned int sample_pages_count; > >> + unsigned int sample_dirty_count; > >> + uint8_t *hash_result; > > > > If I understand, this is an array of hashes end-to-end for > > all the pages in this RAMBlock? > > > > Dave > > > Actually, we do not go through all pages of the RAMBlock but sample > some pages （for example, 256 pages per Gigabit）to make it faster. > Obviously it will sacrifice accuracy, but it still looks good enough > under practical test. Right yes; but that 'hash_result' is an array of hash values, one for each of the pages that you did measure? Dave > >> +}; > >> + > >> void *get_dirtyrate_thread(void *arg); > >> #endif > >> > >> -- > >> 1.8.3.1 > >> > > -- > > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK > > > > > > . > > > -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK