* [PATCH] f2fs: fix incorrect FI_NO_EXTENT handling in __destroy_extent_node()
@ 2026-04-22 7:35 Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-22 12:33 ` Chao Yu
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Yongpeng Yang @ 2026-04-22 7:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chao Yu, Jaegeuk Kim
Cc: linux-f2fs-devel, Yongpeng Yang, Yongpeng Yang, stable
From: yangyongpeng <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
When __destroy_extent_node() sets the inode flag FI_NO_EXTENT, it does
not reset the length of the largest extent to 0 and update the inode
folio. Since modifications to the extent tree are disallowed afterward,
the cached largest extent may become stale. This can trigger the
following error in xfstests generic/388:
F2FS-fs (dm-0): sanity_check_extent_cache: inode (ino=1761) extent info [220057, 57, 6] is incorrect, run fsck to fix
In the f2fs_drop_inode path, __destroy_extent_node() does not need to
guarantee that et->node_cnt is 0, because concurrency with writeback
is expected in this path, and writeback may update the extent cache.
This patch updates __destroy_extent_node() to avoid setting the inode
flag FI_NO_EXTENT, and to remove the check zero of et->node_cnt.
Fixes: ed78aeebef05 ("f2fs: fix node_cnt race between extent node destroy and writeback")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reported-by: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Suggested-by: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: yangyongpeng <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
---
fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c | 4 ----
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
index 87169fd29d89..3adbead27953 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
@@ -645,14 +645,10 @@ static unsigned int __destroy_extent_node(struct inode *inode,
while (atomic_read(&et->node_cnt)) {
write_lock(&et->lock);
- if (!is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
- set_inode_flag(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT);
node_cnt += __free_extent_tree(sbi, et, nr_shrink);
write_unlock(&et->lock);
}
- f2fs_bug_on(sbi, atomic_read(&et->node_cnt));
-
return node_cnt;
}
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix incorrect FI_NO_EXTENT handling in __destroy_extent_node()
2026-04-22 7:35 [PATCH] f2fs: fix incorrect FI_NO_EXTENT handling in __destroy_extent_node() Yongpeng Yang
@ 2026-04-22 12:33 ` Chao Yu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Chao Yu @ 2026-04-22 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yongpeng Yang, Jaegeuk Kim; +Cc: chao, linux-f2fs-devel, Yongpeng Yang, stable
On 4/22/2026 3:35 PM, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
> From: yangyongpeng <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
>
> When __destroy_extent_node() sets the inode flag FI_NO_EXTENT, it does
> not reset the length of the largest extent to 0 and update the inode
> folio. Since modifications to the extent tree are disallowed afterward,
> the cached largest extent may become stale. This can trigger the
> following error in xfstests generic/388:
>
> F2FS-fs (dm-0): sanity_check_extent_cache: inode (ino=1761) extent info [220057, 57, 6] is incorrect, run fsck to fix
>
> In the f2fs_drop_inode path, __destroy_extent_node() does not need to
> guarantee that et->node_cnt is 0, because concurrency with writeback
> is expected in this path, and writeback may update the extent cache.
>
> This patch updates __destroy_extent_node() to avoid setting the inode
> flag FI_NO_EXTENT, and to remove the check zero of et->node_cnt.
>
> Fixes: ed78aeebef05 ("f2fs: fix node_cnt race between extent node destroy and writeback")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Reported-by: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
> Suggested-by: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: yangyongpeng <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c | 4 ----
> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
> index 87169fd29d89..3adbead27953 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
> @@ -645,14 +645,10 @@ static unsigned int __destroy_extent_node(struct inode *inode,
>
> while (atomic_read(&et->node_cnt)) {
> write_lock(&et->lock);
> - if (!is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
> - set_inode_flag(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT);
We'd better revert all change lines in "f2fs: fix node_cnt race between
extent node destroy and writeback"?
Thanks,
> node_cnt += __free_extent_tree(sbi, et, nr_shrink);
> write_unlock(&et->lock);
> }
>
> - f2fs_bug_on(sbi, atomic_read(&et->node_cnt));
> -
> return node_cnt;
> }
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-04-22 12:33 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-04-22 7:35 [PATCH] f2fs: fix incorrect FI_NO_EXTENT handling in __destroy_extent_node() Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-22 12:33 ` Chao Yu
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox