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=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 85E73C433DF for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 07:44:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4345A2070A; Tue, 26 May 2020 07:44:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="UCV9g+t7"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="RzzRWmf9" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4345A2070A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdUG9-0008Qt-Fy; Tue, 26 May 2020 07:44:25 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdUG7-0008Qb-IK for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 26 May 2020 07:44:23 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5scwrV9G91EwXufHwCnBmC/UW/gq/tLkL6QW02KnHXw=; b=UCV9g+t73knrlfC2dkBbX7niK/ eYFpqKpOy4TQqFNmfkNrNN2cTsvcOM5HXMl7RGYtvVk813bBfpD5hgoFwyEF1/nKUzzicBF/VIYIt Ik29I2dWeCuFBV+hnHGWua4Sf5Is+QscP5+H7yzwOOeB3iAOYzkwL1meBmuf1sAFqkh8=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5scwrV9G91EwXufHwCnBmC/UW/gq/tLkL6QW02KnHXw=; b=RzzRWmf9wGyU1gunqaOn4fN5Vu C269jcEeFahgBSiSV9YPu8MtttShn5kd5vtIrD+kt490RQfwX5acqoKFFpNASKKiGKFLgm0MahAWw iR07HsU3FEwjz+Kc6BAgSJlCUIYGrSdFMe66ZN9kIg08Bbu5+6Sz2MVGbm5qwzx59lH4=; Received: from szxga06-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.32] helo=huawei.com) by sfi-mx-1.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1jdUG4-007ONY-E0 for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 26 May 2020 07:44:23 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS407-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 2BE932229573FB02C4C5; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:44:11 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.207) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Tue, 26 May 2020 15:44:10 +0800 To: Jaegeuk Kim References: <20200526015917.GB207949@google.com> <9a09da49-9b3d-68c3-f47f-40bb7e4309b8@huawei.com> <20200526022646.GA226136@google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: <36fc95db-96e1-a93b-737a-c8bf34ca00f3@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 15:44:08 +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: <20200526022646.GA226136@google.com> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Headers-End: 1jdUG4-007ONY-E0 Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] Discard issue X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Linux F2FS Dev Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 2020/5/26 10:26, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 05/26, Chao Yu wrote: >> Hi Jaegeuk, >> >> On 2020/5/26 9:59, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> Hi Chao, >>> >>> I'm hitting segment.c:1065 when running longer fsstress (1000s) with error >> >> (1000s) do you mean time in single round or total time of multi rounds? >> >>> injection. Do you have any issue from your side? >> >> I haven't hit that before, in my test, in single round, fsstress won't last long >> time (normally about 10s+ for each round). >> >> Below is por_fsstress() implementation in my code base: >> >> por_fsstress() >> { >> _fs_opts >> >> while true; do >> ltp/fsstress -x "echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches" -X 10 -r -f fsync=8 -f sync=0 -f write=4 -f dwrite=2 -f truncate=6 -f allocsp=0 -f bulkstat=0 -f bulkstat1=0 -f freesp=0 -f zero=1 -f collapse=1 -f insert=1 -f resvsp=0 -f unresvsp=0 -S t -p 20 -n 200000 -d $TESTDIR/test & >> sleep 10 >> src/godown $TESTDIR >> killall fsstress >> sleep 5 >> umount $TESTDIR >> if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then >> for i in `seq 1 50` >> do >> umount $TESTDIR >> if [ $? -eq 0]; then >> break >> fi >> sleep 5 >> done >> fi >> echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches >> _fsck >> _mount f2fs >> rm $TESTDIR/testfile >> touch $TESTDIR/testfile >> umount $TESTDIR >> _fsck >> _mount f2fs >> _rm_50 >> done >> } >> >> Did you update this code? >> >> Could you share more test configuration, like mkfs option, device size, mount option, >> new por_fsstress() implementation if it exists? I can try to reproduce this issue >> in my env. > > I just changed, in __run_godown_fsstress(), sleep 1000 instead of 10. > > https://github.com/jaegeuk/xfstests-f2fs/blob/f2fs/run.sh#L249 > > ./run.sh por_fsstress Reproducing... Thanks, > >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> . >>> > . > _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel