From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
To: Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@huawei.com>, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc: <chao@kernel.org>, <yunlong.song@icloud.com>,
<miaoxie@huawei.com>, <bintian.wang@huawei.com>,
<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] f2fs: add bug_on when f2fs_gc even fails to get one victim
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 14:56:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d036e6c2-af73-3781-242d-5d56a0933e8a@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7433d584-b1e0-76e9-a6e4-8da1218dd71d@huawei.com>
On 2017/11/7 12:01, Yunlong Song wrote:
> Sorry, misunderstanding, because I think when sync == true, FG_GC does not
> check has_not_enough_free_secs, so maybe it does not have to do any gc
> at all.
> For example, if there are 100 segments for f2fs, and 20 segments are full or
> valid blocks over fggc_threshold, then it is correct to fail in get victim.
>
>
> On 2017/11/7 11:26, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> On 11/07, Yunlong Song wrote:
>>> Because I find that some out-of-free problem is caused by the failure
>>> of get victim target. For example, chao has pointed out that he has
>>> found out a bug when adding this bug_on last week.
>> That's NOT what I asked. Why not checking FG_GC all the time like this?
>>
>> f2fs_bug_on(sbi, !total_freed && gc_type == FG_GC);
ioctl(F2FS_IOC_GARBAGE_COLLECT, &1) will simply trigger this bug_on, so we
have to check the conditon only when we run out-of-free-space?
Thanks,
>>
>>> On 2017/11/7 10:40, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>>> On 11/06, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>>>> On 11/06, Yunlong Song wrote:
>>>>>> Agree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2017/11/3 11:44, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/13, Yunlong Song wrote:
>>>>>>>> This can help us to debug on some corner case.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@huawei.com>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/gc.c | 6 +++++-
>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>>>>>> index 197ebf4..2b03202 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -986,6 +986,7 @@ int f2fs_gc(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, bool sync,
>>>>>>>> .ilist = LIST_HEAD_INIT(gc_list.ilist),
>>>>>>>> .iroot = RADIX_TREE_INIT(GFP_NOFS),
>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>> + bool need_fggc = false;
>>>>>>>> trace_f2fs_gc_begin(sbi->sb, sync, background,
>>>>>>>> get_pages(sbi, F2FS_DIRTY_NODES),
>>>>>>>> @@ -1018,8 +1019,10 @@ int f2fs_gc(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, bool sync,
>>>>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>>>>> goto stop;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> - if (has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0))
>>>>>>>> + if (has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0)) {
>>>>>>>> gc_type = FG_GC;
>>>>>>>> + need_fggc = true;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> /* f2fs_balance_fs doesn't need to do BG_GC in critical path. */
>>>>>>>> @@ -1028,6 +1031,7 @@ int f2fs_gc(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, bool sync,
>>>>>>>> goto stop;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> if (!__get_victim(sbi, &segno, gc_type)) {
>>>>>>>> + f2fs_bug_on(sbi, !total_freed && need_fggc);
>>>>>>> Just like this?
>>>>>> That's OK.
>>>>> I'm not quite sure whether this is really a bug_on case.
>>>>> Let me make it WARN_ON() for debugging purpose first.
>>>> BTW, why is this the special case where BG_GC detects FG_GC?
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>>> f2fs_bug_on(sbi, !total_freed && !sync && gc_type == FG_GC);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ret = -ENODATA;
>>>>>>>> goto stop;
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> 1.8.5.2
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Yunlong Song
>>>>>>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks,
>>> Yunlong Song
>>>
>> .
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-07 6:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-11 13:51 [PATCH] " Yunlong Song
2017-10-12 23:23 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2017-10-13 1:09 ` Yunlong Song
2017-10-13 2:29 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2017-10-13 11:09 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu
2017-10-13 11:20 ` Yunlong Song
2017-10-13 12:24 ` Chao Yu
2017-10-13 13:31 ` [PATCH v2] " Yunlong Song
2017-10-14 0:17 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu
2017-10-14 12:34 ` Yunlong Song
2017-10-16 3:25 ` Chao Yu
2017-10-31 1:32 ` Yunlong Song
2017-10-31 3:17 ` Chao Yu
2017-10-31 3:30 ` Yunlong Song
2017-11-03 3:28 ` Yunlong Song
2017-11-03 3:44 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2017-11-03 15:08 ` 宋云龙
2017-11-06 1:12 ` Yunlong Song
2017-11-07 2:38 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2017-11-07 2:40 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2017-11-07 3:16 ` Yunlong Song
2017-11-07 3:26 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2017-11-07 4:01 ` Yunlong Song
2017-11-07 6:56 ` Chao Yu [this message]
2017-11-08 3:06 ` Yunlong Song
2017-11-09 17:59 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2017-11-10 2:11 ` Yunlong Song
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d036e6c2-af73-3781-242d-5d56a0933e8a@huawei.com \
--to=yuchao0@huawei.com \
--cc=bintian.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=chao@kernel.org \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miaoxie@huawei.com \
--cc=yunlong.song@huawei.com \
--cc=yunlong.song@icloud.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®