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=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 67CFAC072B1 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 03:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AE1320717 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 03:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727825AbfE1DSG (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 May 2019 23:18:06 -0400 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:17587 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727562AbfE1DSG (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 May 2019 23:18:06 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS406-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 18C09329113E43BBD8AE; Tue, 28 May 2019 11:18:04 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Tue, 28 May 2019 11:17:58 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] f2fs: ratelimit recovery messages To: Sahitya Tummala CC: Jaegeuk Kim , , References: <1558962655-25994-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org> <94025a6d-f485-3811-5521-ed5c9b4d1d77@huawei.com> <20190528030509.GE10043@codeaurora.org> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: <2575bd54-d67c-6b26-ebf7-d6adb2e193a7@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 11:17:59 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190528030509.GE10043@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Sahitya, On 2019/5/28 11:05, Sahitya Tummala wrote: > Hi Chao, > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 09:23:15AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: >> Hi Sahitya, >> >> On 2019/5/27 21:10, Sahitya Tummala wrote: >>> Ratelimit the recovery logs, which are expected in case >>> of sudden power down and which could result into too >>> many prints. >> >> FYI >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/973837/ >> >> IMO, we need those logs to provide evidence during trouble-shooting of file data >> corruption or file missing problem... >> > In one of the logs, I have noticed there were ~400 recovery prints in the I think its order of magnitudes is not such bad, if there is redundant logs such as the one in do_recover_data(), we can improve it. > kernel bootup. I noticed your patch above and with that now we can always get > the error returned by f2fs_recover_fsync_data(), which should be good enough > for knowing the status of recovered files I thought. Do you think we need > individually each file status as well? Yes, I think so, we need them for the detailed info. :) Thanks, > > Thanks, > >> So I suggest we can keep log as it is in recover_dentry/recover_inode, and for >> the log in do_recover_data, we can record recovery info [isize_kept, >> recovered_count, err ...] into struct fsync_inode_entry, and print them in >> batch, how do you think? >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala >>> --- >>> v2: >>> - fix minor formatting and add new line for printk >>> >>> fs/f2fs/recovery.c | 18 +++++++++--------- >>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c >>> index e04f82b..60d7652 100644 >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c >>> @@ -188,8 +188,8 @@ static int recover_dentry(struct inode *inode, struct page *ipage, >>> name = ""; >>> else >>> name = raw_inode->i_name; >>> - f2fs_msg(inode->i_sb, KERN_NOTICE, >>> - "%s: ino = %x, name = %s, dir = %lx, err = %d", >>> + printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE >>> + "%s: ino = %x, name = %s, dir = %lx, err = %d\n", >>> __func__, ino_of_node(ipage), name, >>> IS_ERR(dir) ? 0 : dir->i_ino, err); >>> return err; >>> @@ -292,8 +292,8 @@ static int recover_inode(struct inode *inode, struct page *page) >>> else >>> name = F2FS_INODE(page)->i_name; >>> >>> - f2fs_msg(inode->i_sb, KERN_NOTICE, >>> - "recover_inode: ino = %x, name = %s, inline = %x", >>> + printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE >>> + "recover_inode: ino = %x, name = %s, inline = %x\n", >>> ino_of_node(page), name, raw->i_inline); >>> return 0; >>> } >>> @@ -642,11 +642,11 @@ static int do_recover_data(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct inode *inode, >>> err: >>> f2fs_put_dnode(&dn); >>> out: >>> - f2fs_msg(sbi->sb, KERN_NOTICE, >>> - "recover_data: ino = %lx (i_size: %s) recovered = %d, err = %d", >>> - inode->i_ino, >>> - file_keep_isize(inode) ? "keep" : "recover", >>> - recovered, err); >>> + printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE >>> + "recover_data: ino = %lx (i_size: %s) recovered = %d, err = %d\n", >>> + inode->i_ino, >>> + file_keep_isize(inode) ? "keep" : "recover", >>> + recovered, err); >>> return err; >>> } >>> >>> >