From: "韩棋 via Linux-f2fs-devel" <linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, "jaegeuk@kernel.org" <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
<linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: modify f2fs_is_checkpoint_ready logic to allow more data to be written with the CP disable
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 03:45:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <37129398-430d-4a2a-b17a-a38cdc2bd9e6@vivo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <febd8e72-acf6-4f33-9a49-4f09f4b5a25a@kernel.org>
在 2024/10/22 11:39, Chao Yu 写道:
> On 2024/10/22 11:14, 韩棋 wrote:
>> 在 2024/10/22 10:53, Chao Yu 写道:
>>> On 2024/10/9 18:27, Qi Han wrote:
>>>> When the free segment is used up during CP disable, many write or
>>>> ioctl operations will get ENOSPC error codes, even if there are
>>>> still many blocks available. We can reproduce it in the following
>>>> steps:
>>>>
>>>> dd if=/dev/zero of=f2fs.img bs=1M count=55
>>>> mkfs.f2fs -f f2fs.img
>>>> mount f2fs.img f2fs_dir -o checkpoint=disable:10%
>>>> cd f2fs_dir
>>>> dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=1M count=50
>>>> sync
>>>> rm bigfile
>>>> i=1; while [[ $i -lt 10000000 ]]; do (file_name=./file$i; dd \
>>>> if=/dev/random of=$file_name bs=1M count=0); i=$((i+1)); done
>>>> stat -f ./
>>>>
>>>> In f2fs_need_SSR() function, it is allowed to use SSR to allocate
>>>> blocks when CP is disabled, so in f2fs_is_checkpoint_ready function,
>>>> can we judge the number of invalid blocks when free segment is not
>>>> enough, and return ENOSPC only if the number of invalid blocks is
>>>> also not enough?
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Qi Han <hanqi@vivo.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> fs/f2fs/segment.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.h b/fs/f2fs/segment.h
>>>> index 71adb4a43bec..9bf0cf3a6a31 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.h
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.h
>>>> @@ -637,12 +637,33 @@ static inline bool has_enough_free_secs(struct
>>>> f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>>>> return !has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, freed, needed);
>>>> }
>>>> +static inline bool has_enough_available_blocks(struct f2fs_sb_info
>>>> *sbi)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned int total_free_blocks = sbi->user_block_count -
>>>> + valid_user_blocks(sbi) -
>>>> + sbi->current_reserved_blocks;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (total_free_blocks <= sbi->unusable_block_count)
>>>> + total_free_blocks = 0;
>>>> + else
>>>> + total_free_blocks -= sbi->unusable_block_count;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (total_free_blocks > F2FS_OPTION(sbi).root_reserved_blocks)
>>>> + total_free_blocks -= F2FS_OPTION(sbi).root_reserved_blocks;
>>>> + else
>>>> + total_free_blocks = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + return (total_free_blocks > 0) ? true : false;
>>>
>>> Can you please reuse get_available_block_count() as much as possible?
>>> and cover it w/ stat_lock?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>
>> Thank you for your suggestion. I will send the v2 version patch later.
>
> BTW, it looks your testcase won't create sparse available space in
> segment for following reuse by SSR, can you please update your
> testcase?
>
> Thanks,
Okay, I got it. I'll update later. Thank you for your advice.
>
>>
>>>
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static inline bool f2fs_is_checkpoint_ready(struct f2fs_sb_info
>>>> *sbi)
>>>> {
>>>> if (likely(!is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_CP_DISABLED)))
>>>> return true;
>>>> if (likely(has_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0)))
>>>> return true;
>>>> + if (likely(has_enough_available_blocks(sbi)))
>>>> + return true;
>>>> return false;
>>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: 韩棋 <hanqi@vivo.com>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, "jaegeuk@kernel.org" <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
<linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: modify f2fs_is_checkpoint_ready logic to allow more data to be written with the CP disable
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 03:45:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <37129398-430d-4a2a-b17a-a38cdc2bd9e6@vivo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <febd8e72-acf6-4f33-9a49-4f09f4b5a25a@kernel.org>
在 2024/10/22 11:39, Chao Yu 写道:
> On 2024/10/22 11:14, 韩棋 wrote:
>> 在 2024/10/22 10:53, Chao Yu 写道:
>>> On 2024/10/9 18:27, Qi Han wrote:
>>>> When the free segment is used up during CP disable, many write or
>>>> ioctl operations will get ENOSPC error codes, even if there are
>>>> still many blocks available. We can reproduce it in the following
>>>> steps:
>>>>
>>>> dd if=/dev/zero of=f2fs.img bs=1M count=55
>>>> mkfs.f2fs -f f2fs.img
>>>> mount f2fs.img f2fs_dir -o checkpoint=disable:10%
>>>> cd f2fs_dir
>>>> dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=1M count=50
>>>> sync
>>>> rm bigfile
>>>> i=1; while [[ $i -lt 10000000 ]]; do (file_name=./file$i; dd \
>>>> if=/dev/random of=$file_name bs=1M count=0); i=$((i+1)); done
>>>> stat -f ./
>>>>
>>>> In f2fs_need_SSR() function, it is allowed to use SSR to allocate
>>>> blocks when CP is disabled, so in f2fs_is_checkpoint_ready function,
>>>> can we judge the number of invalid blocks when free segment is not
>>>> enough, and return ENOSPC only if the number of invalid blocks is
>>>> also not enough?
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Qi Han <hanqi@vivo.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> fs/f2fs/segment.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.h b/fs/f2fs/segment.h
>>>> index 71adb4a43bec..9bf0cf3a6a31 100644
>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.h
>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.h
>>>> @@ -637,12 +637,33 @@ static inline bool has_enough_free_secs(struct
>>>> f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>>>> return !has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, freed, needed);
>>>> }
>>>> +static inline bool has_enough_available_blocks(struct f2fs_sb_info
>>>> *sbi)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned int total_free_blocks = sbi->user_block_count -
>>>> + valid_user_blocks(sbi) -
>>>> + sbi->current_reserved_blocks;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (total_free_blocks <= sbi->unusable_block_count)
>>>> + total_free_blocks = 0;
>>>> + else
>>>> + total_free_blocks -= sbi->unusable_block_count;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (total_free_blocks > F2FS_OPTION(sbi).root_reserved_blocks)
>>>> + total_free_blocks -= F2FS_OPTION(sbi).root_reserved_blocks;
>>>> + else
>>>> + total_free_blocks = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + return (total_free_blocks > 0) ? true : false;
>>>
>>> Can you please reuse get_available_block_count() as much as possible?
>>> and cover it w/ stat_lock?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>
>> Thank you for your suggestion. I will send the v2 version patch later.
>
> BTW, it looks your testcase won't create sparse available space in
> segment for following reuse by SSR, can you please update your
> testcase?
>
> Thanks,
Okay, I got it. I'll update later. Thank you for your advice.
>
>>
>>>
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static inline bool f2fs_is_checkpoint_ready(struct f2fs_sb_info
>>>> *sbi)
>>>> {
>>>> if (likely(!is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_CP_DISABLED)))
>>>> return true;
>>>> if (likely(has_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0)))
>>>> return true;
>>>> + if (likely(has_enough_available_blocks(sbi)))
>>>> + return true;
>>>> return false;
>>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-22 3:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-09 10:27 [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: modify f2fs_is_checkpoint_ready logic to allow more data to be written with the CP disable Qi Han via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-10-09 10:27 ` Qi Han
2024-10-17 9:54 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-10-17 9:54 ` Chao Yu
2024-10-18 1:52 ` [f2fs-dev] " Zhiguo Niu
2024-10-18 1:52 ` Zhiguo Niu
2024-10-21 3:43 ` 韩棋 via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-10-21 3:43 ` 韩棋
2024-10-22 2:53 ` Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-10-22 2:53 ` Chao Yu
2024-10-22 3:14 ` [f2fs-dev] " 韩棋 via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-10-22 3:14 ` 韩棋
2024-10-22 3:39 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2024-10-22 3:39 ` Chao Yu
2024-10-22 3:45 ` 韩棋 via Linux-f2fs-devel [this message]
2024-10-22 3:45 ` 韩棋
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=37129398-430d-4a2a-b17a-a38cdc2bd9e6@vivo.com \
--to=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=chao@kernel.org \
--cc=hanqi@vivo.com \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.