Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] f2fs: let __get_victim successfully get a segno in corner case | From | Yunlong Song <> | Date | Thu, 27 Jul 2017 10:56:33 +0800 |
| |
Hi, Jay,
Sorry for the mistake in last mail, the ovp is 462, and the reserved is 235. I check the code and have not found problems with p.max_search yet.
Just forget the this patch, since there is still 870 segments below, so it should not be the assumed case of this patch.
By the way, I have sent another patch to provide f2fs_balance_fs to __write_node_page, similar as that in __write_data_page, to avoid missing f2fs_balance_fs in node page writeback. Please check that.
On 2017/7/26 2:55, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 07/14, Yunlong Song wrote: >> Suppose that the valid blocks of each section are all over sbi->fggc_threshold, >> and even has_not_enough_free_secs is true, f2fs_gc cannot do its job since the >> no_fggc_candidate always returns true. As a result, the reserved segments can be >> used up, and finally there is no free segment at all, and get_new_segment cannot >> get a free segment, filesystem will trap into a wrong status. >> >> To fix this, we record the segno which has a rough minimum cost and return it to >> __get_victim to continue f2fs_gc's job. >> >> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@huawei.com> >> --- >> fs/f2fs/gc.c | 19 ++++++++++++++----- >> fs/f2fs/segment.h | 17 ++++++++++++++--- >> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c >> index fa3d2e2..965e783 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c >> @@ -178,6 +178,8 @@ static void select_policy(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int gc_type, >> p->offset = 0; >> else >> p->offset = SIT_I(sbi)->last_victim[p->gc_mode]; >> + >> + p->min_cost_r = UINT_MAX; >> } >> >> static unsigned int get_max_cost(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >> @@ -194,7 +196,7 @@ static unsigned int get_max_cost(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >> return 0; >> } >> >> -static unsigned int check_bg_victims(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi) >> +static unsigned int check_bg_victims(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct victim_sel_policy *p) >> { >> struct dirty_seglist_info *dirty_i = DIRTY_I(sbi); >> unsigned int secno; >> @@ -208,11 +210,12 @@ static unsigned int check_bg_victims(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi) >> if (sec_usage_check(sbi, secno)) >> continue; >> >> - if (no_fggc_candidate(sbi, secno)) >> + p->cur_segno_r = GET_SEG_FROM_SEC(sbi, secno); >> + if (no_fggc_candidate(sbi, secno, p)) >> continue; >> >> clear_bit(secno, dirty_i->victim_secmap); >> - return GET_SEG_FROM_SEC(sbi, secno); >> + return p->cur_segno_r; >> } >> return NULL_SEGNO; >> } >> @@ -332,7 +335,7 @@ static int get_victim_by_default(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >> >> last_victim = sm->last_victim[p.gc_mode]; >> if (p.alloc_mode == LFS && gc_type == FG_GC) { >> - p.min_segno = check_bg_victims(sbi); >> + p.min_segno = check_bg_victims(sbi, &p); >> if (p.min_segno != NULL_SEGNO) >> goto got_it; >> } >> @@ -369,8 +372,9 @@ static int get_victim_by_default(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >> goto next; >> if (gc_type == BG_GC && test_bit(secno, dirty_i->victim_secmap)) >> goto next; >> + p.cur_segno_r = segno; >> if (gc_type == FG_GC && p.alloc_mode == LFS && >> - no_fggc_candidate(sbi, secno)) >> + no_fggc_candidate(sbi, secno, &p)) >> goto next; >> >> cost = get_gc_cost(sbi, segno, &p); >> @@ -403,6 +407,11 @@ static int get_victim_by_default(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >> trace_f2fs_get_victim(sbi->sb, type, gc_type, &p, >> sbi->cur_victim_sec, >> prefree_segments(sbi), free_segments(sbi)); >> + } else if (has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0)) { >> + p.min_segno = p.min_segno_r; >> + if (p.alloc_mode == LFS && gc_type == FG_GC) >> + clear_bit(GET_SEC_FROM_SEG(sbi, p.min_segno), dirty_i->victim_secmap); > It seems you want to give a victim segment which has valid blocks larger than > fggc_threshold. > > fggc: 507 > reserve: 462 > cnt_full: 25182 > over: 25912 (>= fggc) > less: 870 (< fggc) > > What is ovp segments? > It looks like there are 870 candidates for FG_GC, and GC with 103 segments must > give 104 free segments in the worst case. Is there a problem on p.max_search? > > Thanks, > >> + goto got_it; >> } >> out: >> mutex_unlock(&dirty_i->seglist_lock); >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.h b/fs/f2fs/segment.h >> index 6b871b4..7d2d0f3 100644 >> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.h >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.h >> @@ -169,6 +169,9 @@ struct victim_sel_policy { >> unsigned int ofs_unit; /* bitmap search unit */ >> unsigned int min_cost; /* minimum cost */ >> unsigned int min_segno; /* segment # having min. cost */ >> + unsigned int min_cost_r; /* rough minimum cost */ >> + unsigned int min_segno_r; /* segment # having rough min. cost */ >> + unsigned int cur_segno_r; /* segment # rough process is handling */ >> }; >> >> struct seg_entry { >> @@ -743,11 +746,19 @@ static inline block_t sum_blk_addr(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int base, int type) >> } >> >> static inline bool no_fggc_candidate(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, >> - unsigned int secno) >> + unsigned int secno, struct victim_sel_policy *p) >> { >> - if (get_valid_blocks(sbi, GET_SEG_FROM_SEC(sbi, secno), true) >= >> - sbi->fggc_threshold) >> + unsigned int cur_cost; >> + >> + cur_cost = get_valid_blocks(sbi, GET_SEG_FROM_SEC(sbi, secno), true); >> + if (cur_cost >= sbi->fggc_threshold) { >> + if (p->min_cost_r > cur_cost) { >> + p->min_cost_r = cur_cost; >> + p->min_segno_r = p->cur_segno_r; >> + } >> return true; >> + } >> + >> return false; >> } >> >> -- >> 1.8.5.2 > . >
-- Thanks, Yunlong Song
| |