From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jaegeuk Kim Subject: Re: SMR drive test 2; 128GB partition; no obvious corruption, much more sane behaviour, weird overprovisioning Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 10:27:49 -0700 Message-ID: <20150924172749.GB40291@jaegeuk-mac02> References: <20150810203106.GA4575@jaegeuk-mac02> <20150920235901.GA7017@schmorp.de> <20150921081748.GA5637@schmorp.de> <20150921081937.GA5718@schmorp.de> <20150921095806.GA6809@schmorp.de> <20150923011239.GA32520@jaegeuk-mac02.mot.com> <20150923041523.GB4946@schmorp.de> <20150923060037.GA6667@schmorp.de> <20150923220823.GE36564@jaegeuk-mac02.mot.com> <20150923233937.GE3463@schmorp.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1ZfAJK-00028K-TU for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:27:58 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1ZfAJJ-00018n-Oi for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:27:58 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150923233937.GE3463@schmorp.de> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Marc Lehmann Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 01:39:38AM +0200, Marc Lehmann wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 03:08:23PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > root@shag:/sys/fs/f2fs/dm-1# df -H /mnt > > > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > > > /dev/mapper/vg_test-test 138G 137G 803k 100% /mnt > > > > Could you please share /sys/kernel/debug/f2fs/status? > > Uh, sorry, I planned to, but forgot, probably because I thought the result > was so good it didn't need any checking :) > > > So, I'm convinced that your inital test set "-o1 -s128", which was an unlucky > > trial. :) > > hmm... since the point is to simulate a full 8TB partition, having large > overprovision/reserved space AND large section size might actually have been > a good test, as it would simulate the TB case better, which would also have > larger overprovisioning and the larger section size. > > In the end, I might settle with -s64, and currently do tests with -s90. Got it. But why -s90? :) > I was just scared that overprovisioning might turn out ot be extremely large > with 8TB. > > I have since then dropped -o from all my mkfs.f2fs invocations, seeing > that the resulting filesystem does not actually have 5% overprovisioning. > > > Subject: [PATCH] mkfs.f2fs: fix wrong ovp space calculation on large section > > Hmm, the latest change in > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs-tools.git is from > august 10 - do I need to select a branch (I am not good with git)? I just pushed the patches to master branch in f2fs-tools.git. Could you pull them and check them? I added one more patch to avoid harmless sit_type fixes previously you reported. And, for the 8TB case, let me check again. It seems that we need to handle under 1% overprovision ratio. (e.g., 0.5%) Thanks, > > -- > The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG > -----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net > ----==-- _ generation > ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann > --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp@schmorp.de > -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------