* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-16 17:15 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-24 1:31 ` Chao Yu
2020-07-17 1:54 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (12 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-16 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jaegeuk@kernel.org
--- Comment #1 from Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) ---
Thank you for the report.
I think this is valid point that we need to fix.
I'm testing a RFC patch like this. Thanks.
--- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
@@ -1926,8 +1926,12 @@ int f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
goto continue_unlock;
}
- /* flush inline_data, if it's async context. */
- if (do_balance && is_inline_node(page)) {
+ /* flush inline_data/inode, if it's async context. */
+ if (!do_balance)
+ goto write_node;
+
+ /* flush inline_data */
+ if (is_inline_node(page)) {
clear_inline_node(page);
unlock_page(page);
flush_inline_data(sbi, ino_of_node(page));
@@ -1940,7 +1944,7 @@ int f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
if (flush_dirty_inode(page))
goto lock_node;
}
-
+write_node:
f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(page, NODE, true, true);
if (!clear_page_dirty_for_io(page))
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-16 17:15 ` [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] " bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-24 1:31 ` Chao Yu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Chao Yu @ 2020-07-24 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bugzilla-daemon, linux-f2fs-devel
On 2020/7/17 1:15, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
>
> Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CC| |jaegeuk@kernel.org
>
> --- Comment #1 from Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) ---
> Thank you for the report.
>
> I think this is valid point that we need to fix.
> I'm testing a RFC patch like this. Thanks.
Shouldn't we revert 34c061ad85a2 ("f2fs: Avoid double lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint")
at the same time?
>
> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
> @@ -1926,8 +1926,12 @@ int f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> goto continue_unlock;
> }
>
> - /* flush inline_data, if it's async context. */
> - if (do_balance && is_inline_node(page)) {
> + /* flush inline_data/inode, if it's async context. */
> + if (!do_balance)
> + goto write_node;
> +
> + /* flush inline_data */
> + if (is_inline_node(page)) {
> clear_inline_node(page);
> unlock_page(page);
> flush_inline_data(sbi, ino_of_node(page));
> @@ -1940,7 +1944,7 @@ int f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> if (flush_dirty_inode(page))
> goto lock_node;
> }
> -
> +write_node:
> f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(page, NODE, true, true);
>
> if (!clear_page_dirty_for_io(page))
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-16 17:15 ` [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] " bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-17 1:54 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-17 2:02 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (11 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-17 1:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
Chao Yu (chao@kernel.org) changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |chao@kernel.org
--- Comment #2 from Chao Yu (chao@kernel.org) ---
(In reply to Jaegeuk Kim from comment #1)
> Thank you for the report.
>
> I think this is valid point that we need to fix.
> I'm testing a RFC patch like this. Thanks.
>
Could you please check generic/204 testcase? as this fix diff skips codes added
in commit 052a82d85a3b ("f2fs: fix to writeout dirty inode during node flush").
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-16 17:15 ` [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] " bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-17 1:54 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-17 2:02 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-17 2:26 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (10 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-17 2:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #3 from Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) ---
That passed. could you check your side?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-17 2:02 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-17 2:26 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-17 6:16 ` [f2fs-dev] Fwd: " Chao Yu
2020-07-17 2:47 ` [f2fs-dev] " bugzilla-daemon
` (9 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-17 2:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #4 from Chao Yu (chao@kernel.org) ---
Passed, we should ask Eric to retest in his enviornment, to make sure there is
actually no regression.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-17 2:26 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-17 2:47 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-23 7:11 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (8 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-17 2:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #5 from Zhiguo.Niu (Zhiguo.Niu@unisoc.com) ---
(In reply to Jaegeuk Kim from comment #1)
> Thank you for the report.
>
> I think this is valid point that we need to fix.
> I'm testing a RFC patch like this. Thanks.
>
> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
> @@ -1926,8 +1926,12 @@ int f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> goto continue_unlock;
> }
>
> - /* flush inline_data, if it's async context. */
> - if (do_balance && is_inline_node(page)) {
> + /* flush inline_data/inode, if it's async context. */
> + if (!do_balance)
> + goto write_node;
> +
> + /* flush inline_data */
> + if (is_inline_node(page)) {
> clear_inline_node(page);
> unlock_page(page);
> flush_inline_data(sbi, ino_of_node(page));
> @@ -1940,7 +1944,7 @@ int f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> if (flush_dirty_inode(page))
> goto lock_node;
> }
> -
> +write_node:
> f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(page, NODE, true, true);
>
> if (!clear_page_dirty_for_io(page))
Hi Jaegeuk Kim
for comment 1, can you help provide a full diff for this patch, I can not apply
it directly because of the following error:
> fatal: patch fragment without header at line 3: @@ -1926,8 +1926,12 @@ int
> f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
or Should I merge it by Manually?
thanks a lot~
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-17 2:47 ` [f2fs-dev] " bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-23 7:11 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-24 1:31 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (7 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-23 7:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #6 from Zhiguo.Niu (Zhiguo.Niu@unisoc.com) ---
Hi Jaegeuk Kim
Could I merge this patch in my code for fixing the deadlock issue?
thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-23 7:11 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-24 1:31 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-24 3:21 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (6 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-24 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #7 from yuchao0@huawei.com ---
On 2020/7/17 1:15, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
>
> Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) changed:
>
> What |Removed |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CC| |jaegeuk@kernel.org
>
> --- Comment #1 from Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) ---
> Thank you for the report.
>
> I think this is valid point that we need to fix.
> I'm testing a RFC patch like this. Thanks.
Shouldn't we revert 34c061ad85a2 ("f2fs: Avoid double lock for cp_rwsem during
checkpoint")
at the same time?
>
> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
> @@ -1926,8 +1926,12 @@ int f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> goto continue_unlock;
> }
>
> - /* flush inline_data, if it's async context. */
> - if (do_balance && is_inline_node(page)) {
> + /* flush inline_data/inode, if it's async context. */
> + if (!do_balance)
> + goto write_node;
> +
> + /* flush inline_data */
> + if (is_inline_node(page)) {
> clear_inline_node(page);
> unlock_page(page);
> flush_inline_data(sbi, ino_of_node(page));
> @@ -1940,7 +1944,7 @@ int f2fs_sync_node_pages(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> if (flush_dirty_inode(page))
> goto lock_node;
> }
> -
> +write_node:
> f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(page, NODE, true, true);
>
> if (!clear_page_dirty_for_io(page))
>
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-24 1:31 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-24 3:21 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-24 3:38 ` Chao Yu
2020-07-24 3:38 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (5 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-24 3:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #8 from Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) ---
Chao, why do we need to revert that patch?
Zhiguo,
You can see the patch here.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs.git/commit/?h=dev&id=b0f3b87fb3abc42c81d76c6c5795f26dbdb2f04b
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-24 3:21 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-24 3:38 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-24 3:56 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (4 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-24 3:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #9 from yuchao0@huawei.com ---
On 2020/7/24 11:21, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
>
> --- Comment #8 from Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) ---
> Chao, why do we need to revert that patch?
After applying your new patch, below race condition should no longer
happen, right?
Thread A Thread B
f2fs_write_checkpoint()
- block_operations(sbi)
- f2fs_lock_all(sbi);
- down_write(&sbi->cp_rwsem);
- open()
- igrab()
- write() write inline data
- unlink()
- f2fs_sync_node_pages()
+ if (!do_balance)
+ goto write_node; <---- this avoids running into iput().
- if (is_inline_node(page))
- flush_inline_data()
- ilookup()
page = f2fs_pagecache_get_page()
if (!page)
goto iput_out;
iput_out:
-close()
-iput()
iput(inode);
- f2fs_evict_inode()
- f2fs_truncate_blocks()
- f2fs_lock_op()
- down_read(&sbi->cp_rwsem);
>
> Zhiguo,
> You can see the patch here.
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs.git/commit/?h=dev&id=b0f3b87fb3abc42c81d76c6c5795f26dbdb2f04b
>
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-24 3:38 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-24 3:56 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-24 6:36 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (3 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-24 3:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #10 from Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) ---
if we revert it, we're not going to call f2fs_flush_inline_data() in checkpoint
path, which actually fixes generic/204?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-24 3:56 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-24 6:36 ` bugzilla-daemon
2020-07-24 17:25 ` bugzilla-daemon
` (2 subsequent siblings)
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-24 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #11 from Zhiguo.Niu (Zhiguo.Niu@unisoc.com) ---
(In reply to Jaegeuk Kim from comment #10)
> if we revert it, we're not going to call f2fs_flush_inline_data() in
> checkpoint path, which actually fixes generic/204?
Hi Jaeqeuk Kim,
I still have a problem:
As new patch modified, flush_dirty_inode will be skipped for avoiding dead
lock,
but when/where flush_dirty_inode would be done?
thanks!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-24 6:36 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2020-07-24 17:25 ` bugzilla-daemon
2022-09-27 0:48 ` bugzilla-daemon
2022-09-27 0:49 ` bugzilla-daemon
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2020-07-24 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
--- Comment #12 from Jaegeuk Kim (jaegeuk@kernel.org) ---
It'll be called by node_inode->writepages() -> f2fs_write_node_pages(), which
should be done by flusher in vfs.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2020-07-24 17:25 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2022-09-27 0:48 ` bugzilla-daemon
2022-09-27 0:49 ` bugzilla-daemon
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2022-09-27 0:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
Zhiguo.Niu (Zhiguo.Niu@unisoc.com) changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |CODE_FIX
--
You may reply to this email to add a comment.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint
2020-07-15 12:24 [f2fs-dev] [Bug 208565] New: There may be dead lock for cp_rwsem during checkpoint bugzilla-daemon
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2022-09-27 0:48 ` bugzilla-daemon
@ 2022-09-27 0:49 ` bugzilla-daemon
13 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: bugzilla-daemon @ 2022-09-27 0:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-f2fs-devel
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208565
Zhiguo.Niu (Zhiguo.Niu@unisoc.com) changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--
You may reply to this email to add a comment.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread