Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 21:17:18 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20051006.211718.74749573.noboru.obata.ar@hitachi.com>
To: hyoshiok@miraclelinux.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux Kernel Dump Summit 2005
From: OBATA Noboru <noboru.obata.ar@hitachi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050921.205550.927509530.hyoshiok@miraclelinux.com>
References: <20050921.205550.927509530.hyoshiok@miraclelinux.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2781
Lines: 90

Hi, Hiro,

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Hiro Yoshioka wrote:
> 
> We had a Linux Kernel Dump Summit 2005.

> - We need a partial dump
> - We have to minimize the down time
> 
> - We have to dump all memory
>     how can we distinguish from the kernel and user if
>     kernel data is corrupted

As memory size grows, the time and space for capturing kernel
crash dump really matter.

We discussed two strategies in the dump summit.

	1. Partial dump
	2. Full dump with compression


PARTIAL DUMP
============

Partial dump captures only pages that are essential for later
analysis, possibly by using some mark in mem_map[].

This certainly reduces both time and space of crash dump, but
there is a risk because no one can guarantee that a dropped page
is really unnecessary in analysis (it can be a tragedy if
analysis went unsolved because of the dropped page).

Another risk is a corruption of mem_map[] (or other kernel
structure), which makes the identification of necessary pages
unreliable.

So there would be best if a user can select the level of partial
dump.  A careful user may always choose a full dump, while a
user who is tracking the well-reproducible kernel bug may choose
fast and small dump.


FULL DUMP WITH COMPRESSION
==========================

Those who still want a full dump, including me, are interested
in dump compression.  For example, the LKCD format (at least v7
format) supports pagewise compression with the deflate
algorithm.  A dump analyze tool "crash" can transparently
analyze the compressed dump file in this format.

The compression will reduce the storage space at certain degree,
and may also reduce the time if a dump process were I/O bounded.


WHICH IS BETTER?
================

I wrote a small compression tool for LKCD v7 format to see how
effective the compression is, and it turned out that the time
and size of compression were very much similar to that of gzip,
not surprisingly.

Compressing a 32GB dump file took about 40 minutes on Pentium 4
Xeon 3.0GHz, which is not good enough because the dump without
compression took only 5 minutes; eight times slower.

Besides, the compress ratios were somewhat picky.  Some dump
files could not be compressed well (the worst case I found was
only 10% reduction in size).


After examining the LKCD compress format, I must conclude that
the partial dump is the only way to go when time and size really
matter.

Now I'd like to see how effective the existing partial dump
functionalities are.


Regards,

-- 
OBATA Noboru (noboru.obata.ar@hitachi.com)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/