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=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS 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 E3722C282C2 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 03:42:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0B70218D3 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 03:42:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729723AbfBMDm1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:42:27 -0500 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:3197 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727614AbfBMDm1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:42:27 -0500 Received: from DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 623AB5D5F434A0FFBD01; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 11:42:25 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.134.22.195) by DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 11:42:22 +0800 Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: don't clear CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG To: Jaegeuk Kim , , References: <20190212023343.52215-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 11:42:23 +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: <20190212023343.52215-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/2/12 10:33, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > If we met this once, let fsck.f2fs clear this only. > Note that, this addresses all the subtle fault injection test. > > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim > --- > fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c | 2 -- > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > index 03fea4efd64b..10a3ada28715 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > @@ -1267,8 +1267,6 @@ static void update_ckpt_flags(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct cp_control *cpc) > > if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_SKIP_FLUSH)) > __set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG); > - else > - __clear_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG); I didn't get it, previously, if we didn't persist all quota file's data in checkpoint, then we will tag CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG in CP area, but in current checkpoint, we have persisted all quota file's data, quota files are consistent with all other files in filesystem, why we can't remove this NEED_FSCK flag..? Thanks, > > if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_NEED_REPAIR)) > __set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG); >