All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Namjae Jeon" <namjae.jeon@samsung.com>
To: "'Tetsuhiro Kohada'" <kohada.t2@gmail.com>
Cc: <kohada.tetsuhiro@dc.mitsubishielectric.co.jp>,
	<mori.takahiro@ab.mitsubishielectric.co.jp>,
	<motai.hirotaka@aj.mitsubishielectric.co.jp>,
	<linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"'Sungjong Seo'" <sj1557.seo@samsung.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] exfat: remove EXFAT_SB_DIRTY flag
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 13:03:28 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <001501d67126$b3976df0$1ac649d0$@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <490837eb-6765-c7be-bb80-b30fe34adb55@gmail.com>

> Thanks for thinking on this complicated issue.
> 
> 
> > Most of the NAND flash devices and HDDs have wear leveling and bad sector replacement algorithms
> applied.
> > So I think that the life of the boot sector will not be exhausted first.
> 
> I'm not too worried about the life of the boot-sector.
> I'm worried about write failures caused by external factors.
> (power failure/system down/vibration/etc. during writing) They rarely occur on SD cards, but occur on
> many HDDs, some SSDs and USB storages by 0.1% or more.
Hard disk and SSD do not guarantee atomic write of a sector unit?

> Especially with AFT-HDD, not only boot-sector but also the following multiple sectors become
> unreadable.
Other file systems will also be unstable on a such HW.

> It is not possible to completely solve this problem, as long as writing to the boot-sector.
> (I think it's a exFAT's specification defect) The only effective way to reduce this problem is to
> reduce writes to the boot-sector.
exFAT's specification defect... Well..
Even though the boot sector is corrupted, It can be recovered using the backup boot sector
through fsck.
> 
> 
> > Currently the volume dirty/clean policy of exfat-fs is not perfect,
> 
> Thank you for sharing the problem with you.
> 
> 
> > but I think it behaves similarly to the policy of MS Windows.
> 
> On Windows10, the dirty flag is cleared after more than 15 seconds after all write operations are
> completed.
> (dirty-flag is never updated during the write operation continues)
> 
> 
> > Therefore,
> > I think code improvements should be made to reduce volume flag records while maintaining the current
> policy.
> 
> Current policy is inconsistent.
> As I wrote last mail, the problem with the current implementation is that the dirty-flag may not be
> cleared after the write operation.(even if sync is enabled or disabled) Because, some write operations
> clear the dirty-flag but some don't clear.
> Unmount or sync command is the only way to ensure that the dirty-flag is cleared.
> This has no effect on clearing the dirty-flag after a write operations, it only increases risk of
> destroying the boot-sector.
>   - Clear the dirty-flag after every write operation.
>   - Never clear the dirty-flag after every write operation.
> Unless unified to either one,  I think that sync policy cannot be consistent.
> 
> How do you think?
> 
> 
> BR
> ---
> etsuhiro Kohada <kohada.t2@gmail.com>



  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-13  4:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <CGME20200616021816epcas1p44b0833f14bbad0e25cc0efb27fb2ebd3@epcas1p4.samsung.com>
2020-06-16  2:18 ` [PATCH v3] exfat: remove EXFAT_SB_DIRTY flag Tetsuhiro Kohada
2020-06-16 23:55   ` Namjae Jeon
2020-06-17  7:20   ` Sungjong Seo
2020-06-17  8:41     ` Namjae Jeon
2020-06-18  8:36     ` Tetsuhiro Kohada
2020-06-18 13:11       ` Sungjong Seo
2020-06-19  4:22         ` Tetsuhiro Kohada
2020-07-10  7:36         ` Tetsuhiro Kohada
2020-08-08 17:47           ` Sungjong Seo
2020-08-12  9:19             ` Tetsuhiro Kohada
2020-08-13  4:03               ` Namjae Jeon [this message]
2020-08-18  1:20                 ` Tetsuhiro Kohada
2020-06-16  6:16 Markus Elfring
2020-06-16 14:45 ` Matthew Wilcox

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='001501d67126$b3976df0$1ac649d0$@samsung.com' \
    --to=namjae.jeon@samsung.com \
    --cc=kohada.t2@gmail.com \
    --cc=kohada.tetsuhiro@dc.mitsubishielectric.co.jp \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mori.takahiro@ab.mitsubishielectric.co.jp \
    --cc=motai.hirotaka@aj.mitsubishielectric.co.jp \
    --cc=sj1557.seo@samsung.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.