From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751445AbcFCFJE (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2016 01:09:04 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:39221 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751076AbcFCFJD (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2016 01:09:03 -0400 Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 22:08:58 -0700 From: Jaegeuk Kim To: Chao Yu Cc: Chao Yu , linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix to redirty page if fail to gc data page Message-ID: <20160603050858.GA24882@jaegeuk> References: <1463807951-10472-1-git-send-email-chao@kernel.org> <20160530023702.GB78763@jaegeuk.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 02:10:50PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > Hi Jaegeuk, > > On 2016/5/30 10:37, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > Hi Chao, > > > > On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 01:19:11PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > >> From: Chao Yu > >> > >> If we fail to move data page during foreground GC, we should give another > >> chance to writeback that page which was set dirty previously by writer. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu > >> --- > >> fs/f2fs/gc.c | 5 ++++- > >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c > >> index 38d56f6..ee213a8 100644 > >> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c > >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c > >> @@ -653,12 +653,15 @@ static void move_data_page(struct inode *inode, block_t bidx, int gc_type) > >> .page = page, > >> .encrypted_page = NULL, > >> }; > >> + bool is_dirty = PageDirty(page); > >> + > >> set_page_dirty(page); > >> f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(page, DATA, true); > >> if (clear_page_dirty_for_io(page)) > >> inode_dec_dirty_pages(inode); > >> set_cold_data(page); > >> - do_write_data_page(&fio); > >> + if (do_write_data_page(&fio) && is_dirty) > >> + set_page_dirty(page); > > > > If this page is truncated with -ENOENT, we don't need to set it dirty again. > > Agree > > > I expect that, if we get an error here, do_garbage_collect() would retry FG_GC > > IIRC, you have reworked the FG_GC flows changed from an infinite loop to trying > do the movement just one time. Here, I think if there are just few of blocks are > failed to be moved, we can give one more time for retrying. How do you think? Mostly I expected here -ENOENT caused by race condition. Do we have another expectation? Thanks, > > > again. > > > > Thanks, > > > >> clear_cold_data(page); > >> } > >> out: > >> -- > >> 2.7.2 > > . > >