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=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 5CE59C3F2D1 for ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 01:16:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2878020726; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 01:16:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="OLtQ8ZEW"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="DJE6egLg" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2878020726 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jA1bB-0005e3-VT; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 01:16:21 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jA1b9-0005dq-AY for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 01:16:19 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=8ym2jHGJHglttsRW7FpZ2KYnZ0BfbaVAm46qQ3wMwaM=; b=OLtQ8ZEWZLn7t3wx2AlAAUQdN9 koRADTikY1vSeJs23k0egPs7/CAhxOlcCa5eAXwZtqiYRs5JXDlOv4M31nwSAtiCGwMRgBj1Ea3gD AwktpfOGEbxgB2S5/lnji7Vi68B04H7C4Qk9DcvU/6kTTqye4bnCqVW6eWY4XN69ypWQ=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:CC:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=8ym2jHGJHglttsRW7FpZ2KYnZ0BfbaVAm46qQ3wMwaM=; b=DJE6egLg505WLrttra48Og0yYO 050agIZdgF8kh3VzeD7QE3KpRWcyZ9oYG2R98jXTdqQ4MkRUN6WLFePGb9wurqoF+e/DbseJuIJOk cYR6H+OlmEKBC5dqp8sa9i9XtcVtKHt7wK8uvuPdyfdb+a+FwUI4cs0t3ZHN3bwT2A2c=; Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191] helo=huawei.com) by sfi-mx-3.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1jA1b7-00HUZr-2g for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 01:16:19 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS410-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 701FE4C8BE47CF47207A; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 09:16:08 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.210) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 09:16:07 +0800 To: Sahitya Tummala , Jaegeuk Kim , References: <1583245766-3351-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: <9edd90a3-85d4-1a9a-ce34-f05cec7e4da5@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 09:16:06 +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: <1583245766-3351-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Headers-End: 1jA1b7-00HUZr-2g Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH V2 1/2] f2fs: Fix mount failure due to SPO after a successful online resize FS X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On 2020/3/3 22:29, Sahitya Tummala wrote: > Even though online resize is successfully done, a SPO immediately > after resize, still causes below error in the next mount. > > [ 11.294650] F2FS-fs (sda8): Wrong user_block_count: 2233856 > [ 11.300272] F2FS-fs (sda8): Failed to get valid F2FS checkpoint > > This is because after FS metadata is updated in update_fs_metadata() > if the SBI_IS_DIRTY is not dirty, then CP will not be done to reflect > the new user_block_count. > > Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala Reviewed-by: Chao Yu Thanks, _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel