>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When selecting a victim using next_victim_seg in a large
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> section, the selected section might already have been
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cleared and designated as the new current section,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> making it actively in
>>>>>>>>> use.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This behavior causes inconsistency between the SIT and SSA.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, does this fix your issue?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is an issue that arises when dividing a large section
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into segments for garbage collection.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> caused by the background GC (garbage collection) thread in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> large section
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> f2fs_gc(victim_section) ->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> f2fs_clear_prefree_segments(victim_section)->
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cursec(victim_section) -> f2fs_gc(victim_section by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next_victim_seg)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't get it, why f2fs_get_victim() will return section
>>>>>>>>>>>>> which is used by curseg? It should be avoided by checking
>>>>>>>>>>>>> w/
>>>>>>> sec_usage_check().
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or we missed to check gcing section which next_victim_seg
>>>>>>>>>>>>> points to during get_new_segment()?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can this happen?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> e.g.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - bggc selects sec #0
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - next_victim_seg: seg #0
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - migrate seg #0 and stop
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - next_victim_seg: seg #1
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - checkpoint, set sec #0 free if sec #0 has no valid blocks
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - allocate seg #0 in sec #0 for curseg
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - curseg moves to seg #1 after allocation
>>>>>>>>>>>>> - bggc tries to migrate seg #1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> That's correct
>>>>>>>>>>>> In f2fs_get_victim, we use next_victim_seg to directly jump
>>>>>>>>>>>> to got_result, thereby bypassing sec_usage_check What do you
>>>>>>>>>>>> think about this change?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -850,15 +850,20 @@ int f2fs_get_victim(struct
>>>>>>>>>>>> f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>>>>>>>>>>> unsigned int *result,
>>>>>>>>>>>> p.min_segno =
>>>>>>>>>>>> sbi->next_victim_seg[BG_GC];
>>>>>>>>>>>> *result = p.min_segno;
>>>>>>>>>>>> sbi->next_victim_seg[BG_GC] =
>>>>>>>>>>>> NULL_SEGNO;
>>>>>>>>>>>> - goto got_result;
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>> if (gc_type == FG_GC &&
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> sbi->next_victim_seg[FG_GC] != NULL_SEGNO)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>> p.min_segno =
>>>>>>>>>>>> sbi->next_victim_seg[FG_GC];
>>>>>>>>>>>> *result = p.min_segno;
>>>>>>>>>>>> sbi->next_victim_seg[FG_GC] =
>>>>>>>>>>>> NULL_SEGNO;
>>>>>>>>>>>> - goto got_result;
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + secno = GET_SEC_FROM_SEG(sbi, segno);
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + if (sec_usage_check(sbi, secno))
>>>>>>>>>>>> + goto next;
>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>> + goto got_result;
>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But still allocator can assign this segment after
>>>>>>>>>>> sec_usage_check() in race condition, right?
>>>>>>>>>> Since the BG GC using next_victim takes place after the SIT
>>>>>>>>>> update in do_checkpoint, it seems unlikely that a race
>>>>>>>>>> condition with
>>>>>>>>> sec_usage_check will occur.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I mean this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - gc_thread
>>>>>>>>> - f2fs_gc
>>>>>>>>> - f2fs_get_victim
>>>>>>>>> - sec_usage_check --- segno #1 is not used in any cursegs
>>>>>>>>> - f2fs_allocate_data_block
>>>>>>>>> - new_curseg
>>>>>>>>> - get_new_segment find segno
>>>>>>>>> #1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - do_garbage_collect
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> do_checkpoint sec0
>>>>>>>> free
>>>>>>>> If sec0 is not freed,
>>>>>>>> then
>>>>>>> segno1 within sec0 cannot be
>>>>>>>> allocated
>>>>>>>> - gc_thread
>>>>>>>> - f2fs_gc
>>>>>>>> - f2fs_get_victim
>>>>>>>> - sec_usage_check --- segno #1 is not used in any cursegs
>>>>>>>> (but
>>>>>>>> sec0
>>>>>>> is already used)
>>>>>>>> -
>f2fs_allocate_data_block
>>>>>>>> - new_curseg
>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>> get_new_segment find
>>>>>>> segno #1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - do_garbage_collect
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I appreciate your patch, it is under testing.
>>>>>>>> but I'm wondering if there's a risk of a race condition in this
>>>>>>>> situation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, yes, I may missed that get_new_segment can return a free
>>>>>>> segment in partial used section.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So what do you think of this?
>>>>>>> - check CURSEG() in do_garbage_collect() and get_victim()
>>>>>>> - reset next_victim_seg[] in get_new_segment() and
>>>>>>> __set_test_and_free() during checkpoint.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about using victim_secmap?
>>>>>> gc_thread
>>>>>> mutex_lock(&DIRTY_I(sbi)->seglist_lock);
>>>>>> __set_test_and_free
>>>>>> check cur section next_victim clear
>>>>>> mutex_unlock(&dirty_i->seglist_lock);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mutex_lock(&dirty->seglist_lock);
>>>>>> f2fs_get_victim
>>>>>> mutex_unlock(&dirty_i->seglist_lock);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> static inline void __set_test_and_free(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>>>>>> if (next >= start_segno + usable_segs) {
>>>>>> if (test_and_clear_bit(secno,
>>>>>> free_i->free_secmap))
>>>>>> free_i->free_sections++;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (test_and_clear_bit(secno, dirty_i-
>>>> victim_secmap))
>>>>>> + sbi->next_victim_seg[BG_GC] =
>>>>>> + NULL_SEGNO;
>>>>>
>>>>> Can this happen?
>>>>>
>>>>> segs_per_sec=2
>>>>>
>>>>> - seg#0 and seg#1 are all dirty
>>>>> - all valid blocks are removed in seg#1
>>>>> - checkpoint -> seg#1 becomes free
>>>>> - gc select this sec and next_victim_seg=seg#0
>>>>> - migrate seg#0, next_victim_seg=seg#1
>>>>> - allocator assigns seg#1 to curseg
>>>>> - gc tries to migrate seg#1
>>>
>>> I meant for above case, below change still can not catch it, right?
>>> since next_victim_seg[] was assigned after checkpoint.
>>>
>>> + if (test_and_clear_bit(secno, dirty_i->victim_secmap))
>>> + sbi->next_victim_seg[BG_GC] = NULL_SEGNO;
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>> I understood what you said.
>> It seems that without a checkpoint,
>> we won't be able to allocate seg#1 in sec0 because when requesting a
>> segment allocation, if it's not within the same section, it checks in
>> a new secmap.
>> please let me know, if there's anything I've missed
>
>Oh, I see, it always try to allocate segments sequentially in a large
>section-size image, thanks for your explanation. :)
>
>static unsigned int __get_next_segno(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int type)
>{ ...
> if (__is_large_section(sbi)) {
>...
> return curseg->segno;
>...
>}
>
>static int new_curseg(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int type, bool new_sec)
>{ ...
> segno = __get_next_segno(sbi, type);
> ret = get_new_segment(sbi, &segno, new_sec, pinning); ...
>}
>
>BTW, I guess it could be more efficient if we can reuse free segment in
>dirty section for conventional device.a
It might cause file fragmentation, so we should consider it
>
>> Thanks
>>
>> static int get_new_segment(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>> unsigned int *newseg, bool new_sec, bool pinning)
>>
>> if (!new_sec && ((*newseg + 1) % SEGS_PER_SEC(sbi))) {
>> segno = find_next_zero_bit(free_i->free_segmap,
>> GET_SEG_FROM_SEC(sbi, hint + 1), *newseg + 1);
>> if (segno < GET_SEG_FROM_SEC(sbi, hint + 1))
>> goto got_it;
>> }
>>
>> find_other_zone:
>> secno = find_next_zero_bit(free_i->free_secmap, MAIN_SECS(sbi),
>> hint);
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>> The detailed scenario
>>>> segs_per_sec=2
>>>> - seg#0 and seg#1 are all dirty
>>>> - all valid blocks are removed in seg#1
>>>> - gc select this sec and next_victim_seg=seg#0
>>>> - migrate seg#0, next_victim_seg=seg#1
>>>> - checkpoint -> sec(seg#0, seg#1) becomes free
>
>So, for this case, we can handle it only in checkpoint.
>
>>> + if (test_and_clear_bit(secno, dirty_i->victim_secmap))
>>> + sbi->next_victim_seg[BG_GC] = NULL_SEGNO;
>
>Do we need to handle sbi->next_victim_seg[FG_GC] as well?
I'll add it and submit the patch.
Thanks.
>
>Thanks,
>
>>>> - allocator assigns sec(seg#0, seg#1) to curseg
>>>> - gc tries to migrate seg#1
>>>>>
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> IMO, we can clear next_victim_seg[] once section is free in
>>>>>>>>>>> __set_test_and_free()? something like this:
>>>>>>>>>> I will test it according to your suggestion.
>>>>>>>>>> If there are no issues, can I submit it again with the patch?
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/segment.h | 13 ++++++++++---
>>>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.h b/fs/f2fs/segment.h index
>>>>>>>>>>> 0465dc00b349..826e37999085 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.h
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.h
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -473,9 +473,16 @@ static inline void
>>>>>>>>>>> __set_test_and_free(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>>>>>>>>>>> goto skip_free;
>>>>>>>>>>> next = find_next_bit(free_i->free_segmap,
>>>>>>>>>>> start_segno + SEGS_PER_SEC(sbi),
>>>>>>> start_segno);
>>>>>>>>>>> - if (next >= start_segno + usable_segs) {
>>>>>>>>>>> - if (test_and_clear_bit(secno, free_i-
>>>>>> free_secmap))
>>>>>>>>>>> - free_i->free_sections++;
>>>>>>>>>>> + if ((next >= start_segno + usable_segs) &&
>>>>>>>>>>> + test_and_clear_bit(secno, free_i->free_secmap))
>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>> + free_i->free_sections++;
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + if
>>>>>>>>>>> (GET_SEC_FROM_SEG(sbi->next_victim_seg[BG_GC])
>>>>> ==
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> secno)
>>>>>>>>>>> + sbi->next_victim_seg[BG_GC] =
>>>>>>>>>>> NULL_SEGNO;
>>>>>>>>>>> + if
>>>>>>>>>>> (GET_SEC_FROM_SEG(sbi->next_victim_seg[FG_GC])
>>>>> ==
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> secno)
>>>>>>>>>>> + sbi->next_victim_seg[FG_GC] =
>>>>>>>>>>> NULL_SEGNO;
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> skip_free:
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> 2.40.1
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because the call stack is different, I think that in order
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to handle everything at once, we need to address it within
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do_garbage_collect, or otherwise include it on both sides.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [30146.337471][ T1300] F2FS-fs (dm-54): Inconsistent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> segment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (70961) type [0, 1] in SSA and SIT [30146.346151][ T1300]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Call
>>>>>>> trace:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [30146.346152][ T1300] dump_backtrace+0xe8/0x10c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [30146.346157][ T1300] show_stack+0x18/0x28
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [30146.346158][ T1300] dump_stack_lvl+0x50/0x6c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [30146.346161][ T1300]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dump_stack+0x18/0x28 [30146.346162][ T1300]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> f2fs_stop_checkpoint+0x1c/0x3c [30146.346165][ T1300]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do_garbage_collect+0x41c/0x271c [30146.346167][ T1300]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> f2fs_gc+0x27c/0x828 [30146.346168][ T1300]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gc_thread_func+0x290/0x88c [30146.346169][ T1300]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kthread+0x11c/0x164 [30146.346172][ T1300]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> struct curseg_info : 0xffffff803f95e800 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> segno : 0x11531 : 70961
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> struct f2fs_sb_info : 0xffffff8811d12000 {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next_victim_seg[0] : 0x11531 : 70961 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-f2fs-devel/20250325080646.3
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 29
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 19
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 47
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> c...@kernel.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yohan Joung <yohan.jo...@sk.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fs/f2fs/gc.c | 4 ++++
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c index
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2b8f9239bede..4b5d18e395eb 100644
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1926,6 +1926,10 @@ int f2fs_gc(struct f2fs_sb_info
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *sbi, struct
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> f2fs_gc_control *gc_control)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goto stop;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + if (__is_large_section(sbi) &&
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + IS_CURSEC(sbi, GET_SEC_FROM_SEG(sbi,
>>> segno)))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + goto stop;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seg_freed = do_garbage_collect(sbi, segno,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> &gc_list,
>>>>> gc_type,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gc_control->should_migrate_blocks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gc_control->one_time);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
