[PATCH 1/2] f2fs: don't need to invalidate wrong node page

[PATCH 1/2] f2fs: don't need to invalidate wrong node page

[Jaegeuk Kim]

If f2fs_new_inode() is failed, the bad inode will invalidate 0'th node page
during f2fs_evict_inode(), which doesn't need to do.

Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
---
 fs/f2fs/inode.c | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
index 24bb8213d974..ef8610bf950f 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
@@ -411,7 +411,10 @@ void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode)
 	stat_dec_inline_dir(inode);
 	stat_dec_inline_inode(inode);
 
-	invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), inode->i_ino, inode->i_ino);
+	/* ino == 0, if f2fs_new_inode() was failed t*/
+	if (inode->i_ino)
+		invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), inode->i_ino,
+							inode->i_ino);
 	if (xnid)
 		invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), xnid, xnid);
 	if (inode->i_nlink) {
-- 
2.11.0

[PATCH 2/2] f2fs: don't overwrite node block by SSR

[Jaegeuk Kim]

This patch fixes that SSR can overwrite previous warm node block consisting of
a node chain since the last checkpoint.

Fixes: 5b6c6be2d878 ("f2fs: use SSR for warm node as well")
Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
---
 fs/f2fs/segment.c | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
index 2ae36d04d03e..684b869e1861 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
@@ -1177,6 +1177,12 @@ static void update_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, block_t blkaddr, int del)
 		if (f2fs_discard_en(sbi) &&
 			!f2fs_test_and_set_bit(offset, se->discard_map))
 			sbi->discard_blks--;
+
+		/* don't overwrite by SSR to keep node chain */
+		if (se->type == CURSEG_WARM_NODE) {
+			if (!f2fs_test_and_set_bit(offset, se->ckpt_valid_map))
+				se->ckpt_valid_blocks++;
+		}
 	} else {
 		if (!f2fs_test_and_clear_bit(offset, se->cur_valid_map)) {
 #ifdef CONFIG_F2FS_CHECK_FS
-- 
2.11.0

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: don't overwrite node block by SSR

[Chao Yu]

On 2017/3/7 5:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> This patch fixes that SSR can overwrite previous warm node block consisting of
> a node chain since the last checkpoint.

Good catch!

Need to consider the impact to other accesser, e.g. is_checkpointed_data,
add_discard_addrs?

Thanks,

> 
> Fixes: 5b6c6be2d878 ("f2fs: use SSR for warm node as well")
> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
> ---
>  fs/f2fs/segment.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> index 2ae36d04d03e..684b869e1861 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> @@ -1177,6 +1177,12 @@ static void update_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, block_t blkaddr, int del)
>  		if (f2fs_discard_en(sbi) &&
>  			!f2fs_test_and_set_bit(offset, se->discard_map))
>  			sbi->discard_blks--;
> +
> +		/* don't overwrite by SSR to keep node chain */
> +		if (se->type == CURSEG_WARM_NODE) {
> +			if (!f2fs_test_and_set_bit(offset, se->ckpt_valid_map))
> +				se->ckpt_valid_blocks++;
> +		}
>  	} else {
>  		if (!f2fs_test_and_clear_bit(offset, se->cur_valid_map)) {
>  #ifdef CONFIG_F2FS_CHECK_FS
> 

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: don't overwrite node block by SSR

[Jaegeuk Kim]

On 03/08, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2017/3/7 5:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > This patch fixes that SSR can overwrite previous warm node block consisting of
> > a node chain since the last checkpoint.
> 
> Good catch!
> 
> Need to consider the impact to other accesser, e.g. is_checkpointed_data,
> add_discard_addrs?

I've checked them. is_checkpointed_data() has nothing to do with this warm node
and this prevents add_discard_addrs to issue discard command.

Thanks,

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > 
> > Fixes: 5b6c6be2d878 ("f2fs: use SSR for warm node as well")
> > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  fs/f2fs/segment.c | 6 ++++++
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > index 2ae36d04d03e..684b869e1861 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
> > @@ -1177,6 +1177,12 @@ static void update_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, block_t blkaddr, int del)
> >  		if (f2fs_discard_en(sbi) &&
> >  			!f2fs_test_and_set_bit(offset, se->discard_map))
> >  			sbi->discard_blks--;
> > +
> > +		/* don't overwrite by SSR to keep node chain */
> > +		if (se->type == CURSEG_WARM_NODE) {
> > +			if (!f2fs_test_and_set_bit(offset, se->ckpt_valid_map))
> > +				se->ckpt_valid_blocks++;
> > +		}
> >  	} else {
> >  		if (!f2fs_test_and_clear_bit(offset, se->cur_valid_map)) {
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_F2FS_CHECK_FS
> > 

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: don't overwrite node block by SSR

[Chao Yu]

On 2017/3/9 5:39, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 03/08, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2017/3/7 5:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> This patch fixes that SSR can overwrite previous warm node block consisting of
>>> a node chain since the last checkpoint.
>>
>> Good catch!
>>
>> Need to consider the impact to other accesser, e.g. is_checkpointed_data,
>> add_discard_addrs?
> 
> I've checked them. is_checkpointed_data() has nothing to do with this warm node
> and this prevents add_discard_addrs to issue discard command.

That's right.

Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>

Thanks,

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>
>>> Fixes: 5b6c6be2d878 ("f2fs: use SSR for warm node as well")
>>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
>>> ---
>>>  fs/f2fs/segment.c | 6 ++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>>> index 2ae36d04d03e..684b869e1861 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>>> @@ -1177,6 +1177,12 @@ static void update_sit_entry(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, block_t blkaddr, int del)
>>>  		if (f2fs_discard_en(sbi) &&
>>>  			!f2fs_test_and_set_bit(offset, se->discard_map))
>>>  			sbi->discard_blks--;
>>> +
>>> +		/* don't overwrite by SSR to keep node chain */
>>> +		if (se->type == CURSEG_WARM_NODE) {
>>> +			if (!f2fs_test_and_set_bit(offset, se->ckpt_valid_map))
>>> +				se->ckpt_valid_blocks++;
>>> +		}
>>>  	} else {
>>>  		if (!f2fs_test_and_clear_bit(offset, se->cur_valid_map)) {
>>>  #ifdef CONFIG_F2FS_CHECK_FS
>>>
> 
> .
> 

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: don't need to invalidate wrong node page

[Chao Yu]

On 2017/3/7 5:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> If f2fs_new_inode() is failed, the bad inode will invalidate 0'th node page
> during f2fs_evict_inode(), which doesn't need to do.

Hmm...should not allow other using of inode->i_ino in following codes of
f2fs_evict_inode, right?

Thanks,

> 
> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
> ---
>  fs/f2fs/inode.c | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> index 24bb8213d974..ef8610bf950f 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> @@ -411,7 +411,10 @@ void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode)
>  	stat_dec_inline_dir(inode);
>  	stat_dec_inline_inode(inode);
>  
> -	invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), inode->i_ino, inode->i_ino);
> +	/* ino == 0, if f2fs_new_inode() was failed t*/
> +	if (inode->i_ino)
> +		invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), inode->i_ino,
> +							inode->i_ino);
>  	if (xnid)
>  		invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), xnid, xnid);
>  	if (inode->i_nlink) {
> 

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: don't need to invalidate wrong node page

[Jaegeuk Kim]

On 03/08, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2017/3/7 5:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > If f2fs_new_inode() is failed, the bad inode will invalidate 0'th node page
> > during f2fs_evict_inode(), which doesn't need to do.
> 
> Hmm...should not allow other using of inode->i_ino in following codes of
> f2fs_evict_inode, right?

Right.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  fs/f2fs/inode.c | 5 ++++-
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > index 24bb8213d974..ef8610bf950f 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > @@ -411,7 +411,10 @@ void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode)
> >  	stat_dec_inline_dir(inode);
> >  	stat_dec_inline_inode(inode);
> >  
> > -	invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), inode->i_ino, inode->i_ino);
> > +	/* ino == 0, if f2fs_new_inode() was failed t*/
> > +	if (inode->i_ino)
> > +		invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), inode->i_ino,
> > +							inode->i_ino);
> >  	if (xnid)
> >  		invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi), xnid, xnid);
> >  	if (inode->i_nlink) {
> > 

Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: don't need to invalidate wrong node page

[Chao Yu]

On 2017/3/9 5:35, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 03/08, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2017/3/7 5:51, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> If f2fs_new_inode() is failed, the bad inode will invalidate 0'th node page
>>> during f2fs_evict_inode(), which doesn't need to do.
>>
>> Hmm...should not allow other using of inode->i_ino in following codes of
>> f2fs_evict_inode, right?
> 
> Right.

I mean those codes below invalidate_mapping_pages(NODE_MAPPING(sbi),,)
After having a look at them, I think it's OK without any change. :)

Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>

Thanks,