From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752206AbaHTKho (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 06:37:44 -0400 Received: from mailout3.samsung.com ([203.254.224.33]:37578 "EHLO mailout3.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750985AbaHTKhm (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2014 06:37:42 -0400 X-AuditID: cbfee61a-f79e46d00000134f-5f-53f47a6706f0 From: Chao Yu To: Jaegeuk Kim Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [f2fs-dev][PATCH 1/3] f2fs: fix incorrect calculation with total/free inode num Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:36:46 +0800 Message-id: <008001cfbc62$bb9959c0$32cc0d40$@samsung.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-index: Ac+6wLJThgCr64cKSzCbCdwER7Oq8g== Content-language: zh-cn X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrJLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t9jAd30qi/BBk8+iVs8WT+L2eLSIneL y7vmsDkwe2xa1cnmsXvBZyaPz5vkApijuGxSUnMyy1KL9O0SuDJmLtrGWnBAqGL9sn0sDYxb +bsYOTkkBEwkDjR9ZIGwxSQu3FvP1sXIxSEksIhRomf2bRYI5wejxL9tJ9hAqtgEVCSWd/xn ArFFgOxDiy6zg9jMAh4SjR3fWUFsYYEoiQ3fJ4LVswioStx8sROsnlfAUmJL4wlGCFtQ4sfk eywQvVoSm7c1sULY8hKb17xlhrhIQWLH2deMELv0JJ6s6mODqBGX2HjkFssERoFZSEbNQjJq FpJRs5C0LGBkWcUomlqQXFCclJ5rqFecmFtcmpeul5yfu4kRHMDPpHYwrmywOMQowMGoxMOr kP05WIg1say4MvcQowQHs5IIr0/ul2Ah3pTEyqrUovz4otKc1OJDjNIcLErivAdarQOFBNIT S1KzU1MLUotgskwcnFINjH0exTFSnx+Y/2Seesc8fOnGS8v2atUuWN4090v5J9Hvxn8uRyzh Mjb8PG9Dz4t1Mee4TQ8KN3AbS7GnchwuzN+3PkvxxHHbvTqd59bN3cLMbOC04+SrQImW9sku U4wZfz65sPJ1doWG1IQd+5fyFU8o7WyXXtKgvySk4bpa/4Rb6y4YKBZ/OabEUpyRaKjFXFSc CABcp0SUXAIAAA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Theoretically, our total inodes number is the same as total node number, but there are three node ids are reserved in f2fs, they are 0, 1 (node nid), and 2 (meta nid), and they should never be used by user, so our total/free inode number calculated in ->statfs is wrong. This patch indroduces F2FS_RESERVED_NODE_NUM and then fixes this issue by recalculating total/free inode number with the macro. Signed-off-by: Chao Yu --- fs/f2fs/node.c | 2 +- fs/f2fs/super.c | 4 ++-- include/linux/f2fs_fs.h | 3 +++ 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c index d3d90d2..b21a04d 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c @@ -1967,7 +1967,7 @@ static int init_node_manager(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi) nm_i->max_nid = NAT_ENTRY_PER_BLOCK * nat_blocks; /* not used nids: 0, node, meta, (and root counted as valid node) */ - nm_i->available_nids = nm_i->max_nid - 3; + nm_i->available_nids = nm_i->max_nid - F2FS_RESERVED_NODE_NUM; nm_i->fcnt = 0; nm_i->nat_cnt = 0; nm_i->ram_thresh = DEF_RAM_THRESHOLD; diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c index 657582f..85d0ae3 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c @@ -505,8 +505,8 @@ static int f2fs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct kstatfs *buf) buf->f_bfree = buf->f_blocks - valid_user_blocks(sbi) - ovp_count; buf->f_bavail = user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi); - buf->f_files = sbi->total_node_count; - buf->f_ffree = sbi->total_node_count - valid_inode_count(sbi); + buf->f_files = sbi->total_node_count - F2FS_RESERVED_NODE_NUM; + buf->f_ffree = buf->f_files - valid_inode_count(sbi); buf->f_namelen = F2FS_NAME_LEN; buf->f_fsid.val[0] = (u32)id; diff --git a/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h b/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h index 6ff0b0b..0ed77f3 100644 --- a/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h +++ b/include/linux/f2fs_fs.h @@ -24,6 +24,9 @@ #define NULL_ADDR ((block_t)0) /* used as block_t addresses */ #define NEW_ADDR ((block_t)-1) /* used as block_t addresses */ +/* 0, 1(node nid), 2(meta nid) are reserved node id */ +#define F2FS_RESERVED_NODE_NUM 3 + #define F2FS_ROOT_INO(sbi) (sbi->root_ino_num) #define F2FS_NODE_INO(sbi) (sbi->node_ino_num) #define F2FS_META_INO(sbi) (sbi->meta_ino_num) -- 2.0.1.474.g72c7794