Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: f2fs: Add f2fs_balance_fs for direct IO | From | Huang Ying <> | Date | Tue, 08 Jul 2014 16:16:52 +0800 |
| |
Hi, Jaegeuk,
On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 00:58 -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > Hi Huang, > > It occurs a merge conflict. > Please check the patch.
Sorry, my fault. I think I need to base my patch on f2fs tree instead of latest Linus' tree?
> Anyway, IMO, it needs to place f2fs_balance_fs somewhere in get_data_block.
Yes. I think so too. So you prefer to add f2fs_balance_fs in both f2fs_direct_IO and get_data_block, or just add f2fs_blance_fs in get_data_block only?
Best Regards, Huang, Ying
> Thanks, > > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 01:46:28PM +0800, Huang Ying wrote: > > Otherwise, if a large amount of direct IO writes were done, the > > segment allocation may be failed because no enough segments are gced. > > > > Signed-off-by: Huang, Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> > > --- > > fs/f2fs/data.c | 6 +++++- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c > > @@ -1038,6 +1038,7 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(int rw, st > > { > > struct file *file = iocb->ki_filp; > > struct inode *inode = file->f_mapping->host; > > + struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_SB(inode->i_sb); > > > > /* Let buffer I/O handle the inline data case. */ > > if (f2fs_has_inline_data(inode)) > > @@ -1046,8 +1047,11 @@ static ssize_t f2fs_direct_IO(int rw, st > > if (check_direct_IO(inode, rw, iter, offset)) > > return 0; > > > > + if (rw == WRITE) > > + f2fs_balance_fs(sbi); > > + > > /* clear fsync mark to recover these blocks */ > > - fsync_mark_clear(F2FS_SB(inode->i_sb), inode->i_ino); > > + fsync_mark_clear(sbi, inode->i_ino); > > > > return blockdev_direct_IO(rw, iocb, inode, iter, offset, > > get_data_block); >
| |