On Monday, 2020-08-24 at 17:14:31 +08, Chuan Zheng wrote: > Add RamlockDirtyInfo to store sampled page info of each ramblock. > > Signed-off-by: Chuan Zheng <zhengch...@huawei.com> > --- > migration/dirtyrate.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/migration/dirtyrate.h b/migration/dirtyrate.h > index 33669b7..70000da 100644 > --- a/migration/dirtyrate.h > +++ b/migration/dirtyrate.h > @@ -19,6 +19,11 @@ > */ > #define DIRTYRATE_DEFAULT_SAMPLE_PAGES 512 > > +/* > + * Record ramblock idstr > + */ > +#define RAMBLOCK_INFO_MAX_LEN 256 > + > /* Take 1s as default for calculation duration */ > #define DEFAULT_FETCH_DIRTYRATE_TIME_SEC 1 > > @@ -27,6 +32,19 @@ struct DirtyRateConfig { > int64_t sample_period_seconds; /* time duration between two sampling */ > }; > > +/* > + * Store dirtypage info for each ramblock. > + */ > +struct RamblockDirtyInfo { > + char idstr[RAMBLOCK_INFO_MAX_LEN]; /* idstr for each ramblock */ > + uint8_t *ramblock_addr; /* base address of ramblock we measure */ > + uint64_t ramblock_pages; /* ramblock size in 4K-page */
It's probably a stupid question, but why not store a pointer to the RAMBlock rather than copying some of the details? > + uint64_t *sample_page_vfn; /* relative offset address for sampled page */ > + uint64_t sample_pages_count; /* count of sampled pages */ > + uint64_t sample_dirty_count; /* cout of dirty pages we measure */ "cout" -> "count" > + uint32_t *hash_result; /* array of hash result for sampled pages */ > +}; > + > void *get_dirtyrate_thread(void *arg); > #endif > > -- > 1.8.3.1 dme. -- Please forgive me if I act a little strange, for I know not what I do.