Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/4] f2fs: flush journal nat entries for nat_bits during unmount | From | Chao Yu <> | Date | Tue, 10 Jul 2018 14:01:22 +0800 |
| |
On 2018/7/10 4:43, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 07/09, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 2018/7/7 5:09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> Let's flush journal nat entries for speed up in the next run. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> >>> --- >>> fs/f2fs/node.c | 7 +++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c >>> index 29237aeca041..0f076fb0d828 100644 >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c >>> @@ -2613,6 +2613,13 @@ void f2fs_flush_nat_entries(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct cp_control *cpc) >>> nid_t set_idx = 0; >>> LIST_HEAD(sets); >>> >>> + /* during unmount, let's flush nat_bits before checking dirty_nat_cnt */ >>> + if (enabled_nat_bits(sbi, cpc)) { >>> + down_write(&nm_i->nat_tree_lock); >>> + remove_nats_in_journal(sbi); >>> + up_write(&nm_i->nat_tree_lock); >>> + } >> >> The case will cover that nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt is zero and there is cached nats in >> journal? > > Yes. > >> >> So enabled_nat_bits() below should be removed? > > It's out of lock, nm_i->nat_tree_lock, logically..
CP_NAT_BITS_FLAG modification should be happened in mount or checkpoint, so there should be no contention.
Anyway, keep it here is okay to me.
Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Thanks,
> >> >> if (enabled_nat_bits(sbi, cpc) || >> !__has_cursum_space(journal, nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt, NAT_JOURNAL)) >> remove_nats_in_journal(sbi); >> >> Thanks, >> >>> + >>> if (!nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt) >>> return; >>> >>> > > . >
| |