Hi Chao, On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:56:59PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > From: Chao Yu <[email protected]> > > We don't need to keep incomplete created inode in cache, so if we fail to > add link into directory during new inode creation, it's better to set > nlink of inode to zero, then we can evict inode immediately. Otherwise > release of nid belong to inode will be delayed until inode cache is being > shrunk, it may cause a seemingly endless loop while allocating free nids > in time of testing generic/269 case of fstest suit. > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]> > --- > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index d736989..34ae03c 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -384,6 +384,8 @@ retry: > f2fs_lock_op(sbi); > err = remove_inode_page(inode); > f2fs_unlock_op(sbi); > + if (err == -ENOENT) > + err = 0; > } > > /* give more chances, if ENOMEM case */ > @@ -424,6 +426,12 @@ void handle_failed_inode(struct inode *inode) > struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi = F2FS_I_SB(inode); > struct node_info ni; > > + /* > + * clear nlink of inode in order to release resource of inode > + * immediately. > + */ > + clear_nlink(inode);
We must call update_inode_page() here to avoid kernel panic. Otherwise, this inode is kept in the gdirty list, resulting in kernel panic when flushg dirty inodes, since it was already evicted. I fixed this and started a round of tests. Thanks, > + > /* don't make bad inode, since it becomes a regular file. */ > unlock_new_inode(inode); > > -- > 2.10.1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
