c – ReadProcessMemory比SharedMemory上的memcpy更快
我正在尝试通过使用共享内存进行通信来改进我的多进程应用程序.我正在做一些简单测试的分析,出现了一些奇怪的东西.当我试图复制存储在SharedMemory中的数据时,使用ReadProcessMemory比使用Memcopy更快.
我知道我不应该这样使用SharedMemory(最好直接在共享内存中读取),但我仍然想知道为什么会发生这种情况.通过进一步调查,另一件事出现了:如果我在相同的共享内存区域(实际上是同一区域)上连续执行2次memcpy,则第二个副本比第一个快两倍. 以下是显示问题的示例代码.在这个例子中,只有一个进程,但问题在于此处.从共享内存区域执行memcpy比在我自己的进程上执行相同区域的ReadProcessMemory要慢! #include <tchar.h> #include <basetsd.h> #include <iostream> #include <boost/interprocess/mapped_region.hpp> #include <boost/interprocess/windows_shared_memory.hpp> #include <time.h> namespace bip = boost::interprocess; #include <boost/asio.hpp> bip::windows_shared_memory* AllocateSharedMemory(UINT32 a_UI32_Size) { bip::windows_shared_memory* l_pShm = new bip::windows_shared_memory (bip::create_only,"GlobaltestSharedMemory",bip::read_write,a_UI32_Size); bip::mapped_region l_region(*l_pShm,bip::read_write); std::memset(l_region.get_address(),1,l_region.get_size()); return l_pShm; } //Copy the shared memory with memcpy void CopySharedMemory(UINT32 a_UI32_Size) { bip::windows_shared_memory m_shm(bip::open_only,bip::read_only); bip::mapped_region l_region(m_shm,bip::read_only); void* l_pData = malloc(a_UI32_Size); memcpy(l_pData,l_region.get_address(),a_UI32_Size); free(l_pData); } //Copy the shared memory with ReadProcessMemory void ProcessCopySharedMemory(UINT32 a_UI32_Size) { bip::windows_shared_memory m_shm(bip::open_only,bip::read_only); void* l_pData = malloc(a_UI32_Size); HANDLE hProcess = OpenProcess( PROCESS_ALL_ACCESS,FALSE,(DWORD) GetCurrentProcessId()); size_t l_szt_CurRemote_Readsize; ReadProcessMemory(hProcess,(LPCVOID)((void*)l_region.get_address()),l_pData,a_UI32_Size,(SIZE_T*)&l_szt_CurRemote_Readsize); free(l_pData); } // do 2 memcpy on the same shared memory void CopySharedMemory2(UINT32 a_UI32_Size) { bip::windows_shared_memory m_shm(bip::open_only,bip::read_only); clock_t begin = clock(); void* l_pData = malloc(a_UI32_Size); memcpy(l_pData,a_UI32_Size); clock_t end = clock(); std::cout << "FirstCopy: " << (end - begin) * 1000 / CLOCKS_PER_SEC << " ms" << std::endl; free(l_pData); begin = clock(); l_pData = malloc(a_UI32_Size); memcpy(l_pData,a_UI32_Size); end = clock(); std::cout << "SecondCopy: " << (end - begin) * 1000 / CLOCKS_PER_SEC << " ms" << std::endl; free(l_pData); } int _tmain(int argc,_TCHAR* argv[]) { UINT32 l_UI32_Size = 1048576000; bip::windows_shared_memory* l_pShm = AllocateSharedMemory(l_UI32_Size); clock_t begin = clock(); for (int i=0; i<10 ; i++) CopySharedMemory(l_UI32_Size); clock_t end = clock(); std::cout << "MemCopy: " << (end - begin) * 1000 / CLOCKS_PER_SEC << " ms" << std::endl; begin = clock(); for (int i=0; i<10 ; i++) ProcessCopySharedMemory(l_UI32_Size); end = clock(); std::cout << "ReadProcessMemory: " << (end - begin) * 1000 / CLOCKS_PER_SEC << " ms" << std::endl; for (int i=0; i<10 ; i++) CopySharedMemory2(l_UI32_Size); delete l_pShm; return 0; } 这是输出: MemCopy: 8891 ms ReadProcessMemory: 6068 ms FirstCopy: 796 ms SecondCopy: 327 ms FirstCopy: 795 ms SecondCopy: 328 ms FirstCopy: 780 ms SecondCopy: 344 ms FirstCopy: 780 ms SecondCopy: 343 ms FirstCopy: 780 ms SecondCopy: 327 ms FirstCopy: 795 ms SecondCopy: 343 ms FirstCopy: 780 ms SecondCopy: 344 ms FirstCopy: 796 ms SecondCopy: 343 ms FirstCopy: 796 ms SecondCopy: 327 ms FirstCopy: 780 ms SecondCopy: 328 ms 如果有人知道为什么memcpy如此缓慢以及是否有解决这个问题的解决方案,我全都听见了. 谢谢. 解决方法
我的评论作为答案供参考.
在大块内存中使用“memcpy”需要操作系统为每个复制的新页面筛选其进程/内存表.反过来,使用’ReadProcessMemory’告诉操作系统哪些页面应从哪个进程复制到哪个进程. 当您使用单页进行基准测试时,这种差异消失了,确认了其中的一部分. 我可以猜测’memcpy’在’小’场景中更快的原因可能是’ReadProcessMemory’有一个从用户到内核模式的额外切换.另一方面,Memcpy将任务卸载到底层内存管理系统,该系统始终与您的进程并行运行,并且在某种程度上由硬件原生支持. (编辑:李大同) 【声明】本站内容均来自网络,其相关言论仅代表作者个人观点,不代表本站立场。若无意侵犯到您的权利,请及时与联系站长删除相关内容! |